Climate Change Supporters Prove They Don’t Have the Courage of Their Convictions
When the idea came up for a debate on global warming, it seemed like a great idea to our tea party group. We had just finished presenting a very successful health care forum in our small town in northern Wisconsin and were looking for the next event to put on the calendar.
Many members said we should just call it a forum, as we would never be able to get any scientists who believe that global warming is a crisis to come to the table. But thinking I would know how to do what no one else has been able to do, I assured them a debate would be held.
That was eight weeks ago. I gave up after many, many emails and too much time spent behind the computer.
Our event is Saturday. Thinking that the most important audience should include those who will have to deal with the issue in the future, we invited over 220 high school students. Let them hear both sides so that they can decipher the conflicting opinions that have lately made it into the news. Knowing society has been preached only the “doomsday” side for a decade or more, it seems only fair to give the “skeptic” side a place at the table. As for the question of a debate, who wouldn’t want to defend their data and facts if they were so certain it was the absolute truth?
I invited scientists from all over the country — even some from around the world — to a fair and balanced event. I was amazed at the lack of response to the many invitations that went out, but more interesting were the insulting, mocking, sarcastic replies I received from scientists who seem to share a similar belief that a debate is ridiculous on such a settled science.
When you deal with Green NAZIS you very quickly learn why they are called Green NAZIS.
Dear Ms. Simac, It would be great if you published some of the replies that you got from those scientists, including their names.
Thanks.
I’m sure Duh!wight agrees with them, Kimberly. Keep up the good work! The false gods of AGW can’t stand the light of day. Or the water vapour that is Cooling it.
It fairly gives the game away, doesn’t it? The typical behavior of idealogues, not scientists. But if the world of science is riddled with the dogmatists of settled science, this is very bad news for humanity. What Kant was to philosophy, these people are to science: rotting it from within. Would now go as far as to state the real target is reason and enlightenment itself. In a way these are momentous times. Will truth win?
You should have published their responses with their names…maybe a blind debate where their published work is compared to real data…along with grants etc.
They can’t defend it. In fact, they can’t show you the data.
propaganda ? it’s clear which side the propaganda is on. funny story: my son sat in on an AGW school assembly given by a national group to high school students a few weeks ago here in Bloomington indiana. he’s been informed of both sides at home – so during the Q and A he asks for the speaker to clarify her comments about cow flatulence, and the speaker clarifies her answer. then my son follows up with (little smart alec) “what about humans, should we hold in our farts” – and believe it or not the presenter said “yes, that’s a good idea unless you start to feel ill and then go ahead and let it out”… sheesh. the lady didn’t even know she’d been punk’d.
How most unfortunate (for them) because if they are unwilling (or unable) to enter into a collegial debate in front of some 220 high schoolers then their cause is truly lost.
God bless you for what you are doing.
Continue in the same vein in front of high school kids on topics such as democracy vs. republic, socialism and eugenics, Keynes vs. Hayek and on and on.
The kids get subliminal brain drenching from media, celebrities, teachers and parents too scared to question the same ‘verities’ they were taught.
The condescending attitude you encountered is not restricted to “climate change scientists”. Not by a long shot. Many politicians have the same attitude towards you and anyone else who dares to use their conscience to guide them through life.
In my experience, UFO “believers” are equally unlikely to show up for an open forum on the subject, when they know they will have to defend their beliefs in front of an audience which is at least averagely scientifically literate. This is why ufological conventions rarely are open to noted skeptics, and why the responses to skeptical analysis usually invoke the “you’re part of the cover-up!” meme’- generally very loudly.
“Global warming” is an example of how the “humanistic” and “social” side of science has been corrupted by myth-making and a desire for power based on “what feels right” as opposed to “what is actually provable”. One of the basic fallacies of the entire field (humanistic) is the belief that “myth is as valid as fact, in fact myth is fact in its own way.”
No. It isn’t.
If someone is pursuing the AGW chimera on the grounds that it “deserves to be true” (which seems to be the case now that the “scientific” framework for it has virtually collapsed), they are engaged in myth-making. Which is a religious function, i.e. the province of priests, not scientists, who by definition must be skeptics.
E.E. “Doc” Smith, who actually was a scientist (Ph.D in Chemistry) was fond of saying in such situations, “Prove it! Prove it or retract it!” The AGW believers have lost their ability to “prove it”, since their duplicity and, frankly, outright falsification of data have come to light. But they still refuse to admit that they have no factual basis for the demands for Draconian measures to “solve” a problem that (a) increasingly looks as though it was a fantasy to begin with and (b) even if it were real, would be essentially immune to any countermeasures we could realistically be able to apply to it. So they aren’t going to “retract” it, either.
Therefore, the only rational response is to tell them, “Sorry- we’re not interested in destroying civilization just to salve your peculiar urges.”
But if you do it, expect to be tarred as “part of the conspiracy” against their oh-so-righteous “cause”. It’s what fanatics do, after all.
clear ether
eon
Maybe, just maybe it is more difficult to conceal a hoax if one has to answer questions and be cross examined? The MSM makes concealment for their buddies so easy. Remember NO MSM coverage for ACORN or Van Jones, but immediate coverage of the O’Keefe investigation of phones not working at the office of a public servant.
Sorry, Mrs Simac, but your event lacked two essential elements necessary for any climate change event.
1) Area not “glamourous” enough (need to have a decent place to park the private plane, with suitable housing and dining accommodations for the entourage.)
2) No chance of networking that could later result in a lucrative grant, or at least the opportunity to garner media attention.
Attack is all they have. When the climategate emails were released, it felt as we would see how they tried to control the debate but that the science would just be subject to different interpretations. Instead, once more rigorous researchers got the data, we see a complete lack of understanding by the “scientists”. In effect, it appears the ones who couldn’t do the math went into climatology, a small field in which they could control the debate and not worry about independent verification. Not only is their room for debate but the closer the global warming proponents’ assertions are probed the more they evaporate.
<a href="http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/12599"AJ Strata over at Strata-sphere has been keeping track of the results of assessments of the data by scientists and engineers experienced in rigorous error management and data quality controls.
I am sorry you had to endure such reprehensible behavior toward you in this matter. This has been an on-going problem with these political and self conflicted advocates. Al Gore for example absolutely refuses to place himself in a position where he has to present his evidence and assertions being subject to public scrutiny and examination. The same is true of that small subset of scientists who have invested their careers in social politics to the detriment of their naturally skeptical professional field. Popular science (no slur intended toward the magazine of the same name)has moved itself into the domain of political allegiance and not one that is popular among the public at large.
I am of the opinion that a considerable number of these scientists did not enter into this condition with the intention to deliberately lie day in and day out about their assertions. I believe they were caught up in a premise and have forgotten their necessity for skepticism. One lie leads to another and when monies and career interests become completely steeped in the Ponzi scheme of lies built around erroneous assumptions, human nature has a tendency to dig in, even for the slaughter.
Without exception, these pigs are feeding at the trough of goverment money grants. Provide the desired (by the grantor) result that AGW is happening, the grant money continues to flow.
My daddy always said, “You can’t expect anything from a pig, but a grunt”
In his SOTU speech Obama mentioned Climate Change Global Warming being a proven science and everybody in Congress laughed..
Sorry,
everybody except Nancy..
It has now gone from a science to a big joke.
Larry the Cable Guy:
“I vacationed near the Arctic Circle last week and a Polar Bear begged me to shoot him because it was so cold.”
Algore turned you down?
I’m amazed.
I am 100% on your side in terms of the AGW swindle; however, it would be wise to correct the sentence in the third to last paragraph that currently reads “smarter then me..”. Not nitpicking, just in the context, it strengthens your already valid argument.
What do you expect? You can’t even get Al Gore to debate.
You’ll excuse me for now, I’m watching the Himalayan glaciers melt on TV.
“I wonder what these scientists are hiding.”
The fact that they are full of it and their positions are unsupportable by such quaint notions as facts and logic.
Dear Mrs. Simac, For the sake of a balanced forum, you could show Al Gore’s slide show and than have the other side respond. At least it would be an attempt to have a fair debate and would allow you to hold firmly to your principles. In addition, I would video the forum and put it out on YouTube. Good luck.
Do not be so certain, KJ, that these esteemed scientists are indeed “smarter than [you]“. The truly intellectually gifted person realizes when s/he has made a mistake, and has the confidence and integrity to act on that new knowledge.
I once heard PJ O’Rourke eloquently define “folly” as “persistence in error.” And if any group of people can be arguably described as engaging in folly, it’s the aforementioned esteemed climate scientists who, against the mounting evidence that their “science” is built on quicksand, stubbornly insist that AGW is a) objectively real and b) the greatest threat humanity faces.
The questions I always ask an AGW activist, and for which I have yet to receive an answer, are these:
- can you document that the mean solar flux at any point on the earth’s surface has remained constant? If you can, and the earth is indeed warming, then any warming activity must be of human origin. (Unfortunately, satellite data since 1979, when instruments of the required sensitivity were first orbited, shows that the sun’s energy output is anything BUT constant.)
- have any of the climatological models used to forecast AGW been validated? That is, given the actual temperatures of the 1930s and 1940s, can they predict the 1970s? Given the actuals from the 50s and 60s, can they predict the 90s? If so, please present both your algorithms and data sets for review. (ummm….. see ClimateGate emails)
- given that our best weather prediction models become unstable after about 7 days due to accumulated errors from the models’ simplifying assumptions (in order to make them computationally tractable), what would give us confidence that we can reliably predict climate not days, but DECADES hence?
- what are we to make of the infamous “hockeystick” model when it turns out that this model yields hockeysticks even when fed random data?
- given that space-based sensors from satellites at Mars (numerous), Jupiter (Galileo) and Saturn (Cassini) have all observed similar and proportional variations in solar flux to that observed at the earth, are we to believe that SUVs on earth are causing global warming on Mars?
- given all these, are we truly willing to enact policies which will have a global impact measured in trillions of dollars and condemn whole segments of the human population to permanent misery and poverty?
Not holding my breath till I get an answer. After all, “settled science” has told us variously that:
- the earth is the center of the universe
- okay, maybe just the solar system
- the earth is roughly 6000 years old
- all combustible substances contain an element called “phlogiston;” this is what makes them combustible
- the brain has no discernible function (well, for AGW activists, this may be true); the heart is the seat of the soul
- man cannot possibly fly
- okay, he can’t possibly fly using heavier-than-air machines
- okay, he can fly, but he can’t fly faster than the “sound barrier”
- okay, he can never ascend into space, because reaction engines cannot work in vacuum
- okay, he can make it into space, but can never reach the moon
&c.
It’s only impossible until somebody figures out how to do it.
The explanation I heard from AGW supporters as to why they do not debate those they slag as climate change deniers: the deniers do not
take into consideration certain things.
Methinks it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
The decline. In their careers.
Liberals (Leftist, Democrats) are liars. That is the heart and soul of Liberalism! They have nothing bigger than themselves to believe in. Truth is to them what they believe it to be. Leftist believes themselves incapable of lying no matter if the evidence suggest otherwise. No questioning them because they are the anointed ones…all others are benighted. Out of thin air they make up numbers and statistics to support their contentions, expect all others to believe what they tell us and then refuse to divulge where this information comes from, telling the benighted that “we wouldn’t understand.” You are just suppose to believe it. To the Liberals any lie that advances their cause is, by definition, the truth.
“My intelligence, my character, and, just a few days ago, my faith were attacked by men, all much smarter then me, who for some reason felt they needed to smear me and our simple, small-town event.”
Let me point out your first mistake: Having more “Education” is not the same as being Smarter. Educated Idiots are not in any way smart.
Or as a friend of mine once taught me, “The difference between Ignorance and Stupidity is that Ignorance can be overcome.”
Anyway, what these men are is much more Dishonest than you are, and they have demonstrated that by their actions.
jd
The Warmists have over-invested: – when their “belief” goes down the chute everything they have – intellectually – goes with it. The World is fine. We don’t need them to “save “us. We will not all die, fry and drown. The future is looking good. Don’t they want to celebrate with us? Aren’t they happy that it was all a terrible mistake, and everything is OK?
No. Look at the hatred in their faces. You have taken away their power over us. THAT is what they need. The power to tell us what to do “for our own good”. Warmism, like Nazism, gives them an excuse to behave terribly against those they oppose. They adopt the language of hatred. You are indeed a very great threat. To them. They are a threat, to all of us.
When they run around saying “The sky is falling” can we really be shocked they are a bunch of chickens?
You’ve missed the point. They’d show up eagerly once you made it clear what you wanted them to say and how much you’d pay them to say it.
They can’t defend it, therefore they do not show up. They are abusive in their language because that is the tool of Alinskyites – ridicule.
In short, they are evil.
Perhaps they are tired of the denier side simply makes up facts to support their position, and understand that in a debate format, where viewers don’t have the ability to fact check every claim that is made, and likely don’t possess the scientific background to see through false claims, that there is no opportunity for truth to prevail. In fact, since the AGW deniers don’t feel constrained by the results of scientific study, they are at an advantage in a debate, since they can make any claim they want, such as “the earth isn’t warming, its cooling”(its not) “the earth’s warming isn’t caused by carbon in the atmosphere, because there was way more carbon immediately before the industrial revolution” (there wasn’t) etc… Scientists however feel that any claim they make needs to be based on facts which puts them at a disadvantage in a shout fest.
The other reason that they probably don’t want to debate, is because the very act of debate is a win for deniers. There is nothing supporting the denier position in science, therefore their position can’t gain scientific legitimacy by publishing papers in scientific journals. They thus turn to influencing public opinion in order to gain legitimacy and the type of debate you propose is one method. The scientists could decimate your side in the debate, but the deniers would still claim victory just because their anti-science nonsense is taken seriously by real scientists. It is like how NASA doesn’t like to give flat earthers legitimacy by debating them.
Of course, as we can see from your example, you deniers will claim victory even when no debate takes place.
The rude and obnoxious behavior you encountered is routinely dished out to all who oppose this great scam, regardless of background and education. I was attending a reception last fall given by the geoscience department of a large midwestern university, for members of the department’s industry advisory council. I am a member of said council. One of the faculty members and I were talking, and the subject of global warming came up. I have known this professor for decades; we are about the same age. I thought I knew his mind, and made the comment that I was afraid our government was in the process of crippling our economy by wasting billions of taxpayer dollars to fight something that either did not exist, or was completely out of our control. Well, he swelled mightily indignate and very stern, and informed me that someone of my intellect should not be questioning “the science”. I was caught off guard, but was also angered by his condescending attitude. So I asked him to describe two or three items that had convinced him that global warming was a reality. He could not or would not answer, but stated that since the National Science Foundation had endorsed the premise, that should be good enough for anyone. He promised to “send me something”. So there you have it….the great High Priests in Washington say it is so, and we all must fall in line, empty our pockets, and show gratitude that our intellectual betters are trying to save us common dunces from our evil ways. By the way, this was just a few weeks before the news of the hacked emails from East Anglia broke, also just before news that this particular individual was a recipient of a very large federal grant to study carbon sequestration. I can’t wait to see this guy again.
I’m not a scientist but I saw some on t.v. a couple of times, and even met one once, I believe that entitles me to some grant money to fund a pseudo scientific research project ?
You should have included the emails and the addresses in your article. It would be very interesting to read them. What a golden opportunity for students to ask questions for clarificatio.
To Linus Bern – what a load of poppycock. It has become abundantly clear that 1) The “science” in support of global warming was based on a set of questionable computer models fed data that had been filtered to arrive at a preconceived result; 2) Any studies questioning the AGW hypothesis were not given the same weighting for publication in peer review studies as the peer review process had been terribly compromised; 3) There were outright lies and falsehoods propagated in the IPCC reports (the most recent example being the Himalayan glacier melting claims). Please, discontinue your lame and condescending defense of what has clearly and demonstrably proven to be an absolute fraud – terribly damaging to science in general.
Kimberly, I’m with Truthseeker @2. Why not publish the letters and names? That would be a very interesting companion post to this one.
Linus, did you lose your security blanket?
Perhaps you’d like to point out a few of those facts you claim Skeptics ‘made up’?
How about the Midieval Warm Period? I mean, at a quick, ten second check I can only find 201 PEER-REVIEWED papers proving that it existed, and it was Global.
Funny thing is, it doesn’t exist in michael mann’s hockey stick graph, which is a central feature of the IPCC report.
And that is a FACT, also.
Please, disprove the ‘FACT’ of the MWP for us, won’t you, linus? Show us how Skeptics are ‘making up’ that fact.
Dear Linus Bern,
Made up? Deniers?
What was made up by deniers about the Himalyan Glaciers scanal. The deniers didn’t put a WWF article in a report that was supposed to consist ONLY of Peer Reviewed Science. The deniers weren’t forced to admit that they included it for the sole purpose of Forcing Government Action. The deniers weren’t the ones aware that this FALSE information was included in the Body of Evidence BEFORE the Copenhagen Summit.
What was made up by deniers about the Coral Reef Degredation Scandal. The Deniers didn’t put a Green Peace article in a report that was supposed to consist ONLY of Peer Reviewed Science.
The deniers never resorted to referring to all the “Science” in the IPCC Report as Peer Reviewed (Emphasis on the words PEER REVIEWED) when the CRU E-Mails were released to try to dampen the effects of those damning letters. The deniers don’t face 10 years in prison as a result of Pending Fraud Charges (see Phil Jones) for thier “Made Up” accusations.
The only thing Made Up is Michael Mann Made Global Warming!
jd
Never Forget: Climate Change is what you call Global Warming when your Global Warming Summit/Conference/Protest is Snowed Out.
First, the notion that man-made global warming is ‘settled science’ is preposterous. There is a debate within the scientific community. It is not between scientists and laymen but between scientists. The East Angelica folks weren’t trying to hide their methods and data from the unwashed masses but from other climate scientists. To deny that fact, as Linus above tries to do, just shows ignorance of the current scientific debate and of the methods of science itself.
Second, science is always about debate. Any scientist who can’t or won’t give a fairly basic outline of the issues involved in the current debate is a fool and a scoundrel. Scientists are constantly writing essays and articles to inform the public about their projects. No, skepticism isn’t ‘flat earthism’, it is an essential ingredient of the scientific project itself. To deny and ridicule skeptics is the sign of bad science.
“The rude and obnoxious behavior you encountered is routinely dished out to all who oppose this great scam, regardless of background and education.”
Yes, while your side merely personally targets people who do objective science, hacks into their e-mails, breaks into their offices, tries to get their careers destroyed over a handful of out of context quotes.
“Climate Change Supporters Prove They Don’t Have the Courage of Their Convictions”
Nope, it just proves they have enough brains not to get involved with a bunch of screaming morons like the tea-baggers.
“Second, science is always about debate. Any scientist who can’t or won’t give a fairly basic outline of the issues involved in the current debate is a fool and a scoundrel. Scientists are constantly writing essays and articles to inform the public about their projects. No, skepticism isn’t ‘flat earthism’, it is an essential ingredient of the scientific project itself. To deny and ridicule skeptics is the sign of bad science.”
What you say is true, but the methods of the denier side are precisely those of the tobacco lobby in the years that it fought to deny the connection to cancer. They weren’t interested in objective science, because by any objective measure smoking causes cancer. Their strategy was to look for any detail within the thousands of studies that were done that was somehow incorrect, some bad math or something, and then endlessly trumpet that and declare by extension that the question wasn’t settled, that there was debate still raging on, and thereby put off the day of reckoning.
Well, the East Anglia lot could all be a bunch of crooks, and it wouldn’t matter, because the science of climate change doesn’t rest on their work. it is broadly support across a wide range of fields.
What you have found is a difference in definitions. In the 3rd and 4th worlds, a scientist is anyone with an advanced degree. It matters not what the degree is. If you have a PhD in basket weaving or animal husbandry you are a scientist. In the USA a scientist is someone that earns a paycheck using the scientific method. Those with advanced degrees that earn their living in administration or as a bureaucrat are not considered scientists in the USA. They are in the 3rd world.
That is why the USA leads the world in hard science Nobal prises, while the 3rd world mostly gathers literature and peace prizes. Prizes that come by politics, not science.
The American left tends to side with the 3rd world in this. So the “scientists” you contacted were mostly not scientists. Look them up and see how many are really bureaucrats. Or Academics.
To Joseph – what a well reasoned assault on the assertions of those who disagree with you. Certainly representative of the infallible logic, decorum, and open-mindedness of the AGW supporters. You’ve proved something, alright, but not what you stated.
Joseph #42
Ooo, way to present your facts! You’ve got me convinced – AGW is real!!
/sarc
Dear KJ;
Congrats, that was an honorable attempt. With their related attacks on you, be careful no address info of yours leaks out – because if they still felt threatened they could point their terrorist organizations Earth First? and Greenpeas on you.
As a former off-road racer out here in SoCal, I’ve been following actions of those groups I’ve referenced above for 30 years, their actions are nothing more than environmental terrorism.
It’s a shame IPCC has elevated them to a position of being pertinent to the environmental debate.
But what is even more of a shame is all the FRAUD, SMOKE and MIRRORS we’ve seen associated with IPCC – it will take years for our real scientific community to recover from the damage that has been inflicted upon them by the IPCC crew.
Even worse, we still have Obama and DEMs talking of implementing Cap&Tax.
I read a somewhat apologetic article by CBS talking of the extensive taxpayer costs we’ll have for Copenhagen. They’re estimate was $1.1Mil. We had 165+ people who needed to go to Copenhagen, for some reason. And they’re article did not address costs for Air Force One, which research shows me runs $67k per hour, and it’s never just one plane, it’s two (badckup always needs to be ready). So with that, based on an aprox 10 hour one way direct flight, I show $2.68Mil, which needs to be added to the lowball number CBS gave us above.
And then we need to add in the bar and food bill for our CongressCritters and company – $101K – probably another lowball #.
I’d really like to know how long were going to continue to be boondoggled by Environmental EXTREMISM! My count is at least 3 more Obama years.
Whomever leaked the ClimateGate data just prior to Copenhagen is a HERO in my books, legal or illegal, at least it got us to focus in on the real nature of the data presented at Copenhagen.
And much of the Copenhagen/IPCC data was FRAUDULENT, period. I could have told you that in advance, though most of my supporting material would be just opinion. It’s much better the way it came out!
I’m just sure we have much more fraud to discover in many other IPCC reports. And I fear the IPCC name hasn’t been tarnished quite badly enough. Not with Obama still talking Cap&Tax…
Ms. Simac, I would strongly recommend that you save those ugly and rude responses you have received. Then, when AGW is finally disproven, or more scientists come out of the woodwork, you can publish the names of those idiots who claimed the time for debate is over and the science is proven. Shame them into losing their tenure or their jobs. I predict that day will come within 24 months or less.
sounds like a big victory for the warmerbaggers.
Dear
“Well, the East Anglia lot could all be a bunch of crooks, and it wouldn’t matter, because the science of climate change doesn’t rest on their work. it is broadly support across a wide range of fields.”
Excuse me, but get your facts straight before trying to appear superior.
CRU is one of only three groups that have a compilation of global climate data, the other two being NOAA and NASA Goddard. OOOoooops. It seems that the NOAA and NASA Goddard got their foundation from another source. That’s right CRU.
In fact, the one thing you learn from actually reading the e-mails (which are hardly out of context) is the incestuous relationship these three groups have with one another.
Therfore your point is not only moot, it fails to recognize the “Fruits of the Poisoned Tree” that exists. Add to that aside from Green Peace and WWF, IPCC relied heavily on the data provided by CRU.
So let’s recap your agguments.
Since Global Warming alarmists are right and deniers are wrong, we don’t need to debate.
Therefore not showing up for a debate proves that Global Warming Alarmists are right and deniers are wrong.
Just because the foundational data for Global Warming Alarmists is corrupted and wrong, Global Warming Alarmists are still right.
Amazing.
jd
Definitions;
Person who releases confidential information…
Liberal == Heroic Whistleblower
Conservative == Illegal Hacker
We skeptics Are interest in ‘objective’ science, linus, that is Why we have a problem with the AGW crowd- very little of their politicized ‘science’ is objective.
And btw, what about that MWP? You still have not explained to us Skeptics how it doesn’t exist, according to michael mann and the IPCC.
Yes, why can’t people who misspell ‘nazi’ on their protest signs get any scientists to debate with them. It must be because the scientists are scared and stupid.
45. Always Question: “To Joseph – what a well reasoned assault on the assertions of those who disagree with you.”
Well, AQ, we’ve seen the way tea-baggers “debated” health care at those town meetings. Reason has nothing to do with it.
“In addition, the shared attitude of arrogance towards me or anybody who would even consider such “propaganda” as an alternative view was surprising. Humorous at first, but then a bit hurtful. My intelligence, my character, and, just a few days ago, my faith were attacked by men, all much smarter then me, who for some reason felt they needed to smear me and our simple, small-town event.”
They really aren’t “smarter than you” what they are is “poor, blind and naked”. These so-called scientists have been stripped naked and exposed for what they are; liars and cheats who are just part of the “big government” snake that has wrapped itself around all things encouraging certain results that will support it’s desire to suck more life from the taxpayer. Real intelligence is the ability to see things as they really are and not as someone else would have you see them for purposes separate from the truth. In the case of the global warmers, they were being paid to achieve certain results and they did, but they had to lie to do it because their premise was false to begin with.
They won’t debate because their lie will not survive exposure to the truth so they bloviate saying “the science is settled”. The truth about science is that we haven’t reached the end of any understanding to date, in other words we know nothing as we ought to know it. Their is surely more to learn about everything and we ought to remain humble in the process and always seek the truth.
Keep the faith sister.
@ eon:
E.E. “Doc” Smith, who actually was a scientist (Ph.D in Chemistry) was fond of saying in such situations, “Prove it! Prove it or retract it!”
Smith was a “Cereal Scientist”; not just Wheaties, but any product
manufactured as large quantities of small pieces, like the grains
of propellant in an artillery shell.
some of his (or others) war-time stories made it into his novels;
When you have had to pick up the pieces of one of your friends and
co-workers, because some meddling manager changed a manufacturing
process without consulting the engineers, excuses about pressure
from TPTB to improve productivity do not wash.
Truthseeker read my Mind……
Would love to see what came back.. Wonder how privacy works on that, though.. Hm.
~
American cis is bummed out their warming scam has been foiled,this was their next false flag attack.
American cia is bummed out their warming scam has been foiled,this was their next false flag attack.
WHY DON’T THEY JUST DROP THIS SCAM,LIKE HEALTH CARE,CAP AND SCAM,PLEASE,EVEN THE MOST RETARDED LIB CAN SEE THIS.
“I wonder what these scientists are hiding.”
Mainly, they’re hiding the fact that they never earned the title of “scientist” but rather got it as a reward for playing nice in the academic scam that the federal government has built up over the past forty years. Nine out of ten of them would probably flunk any realistic test of their scientific knowledge and so they hide behind arrogance. Where else could they make the kind of money they do without ever having to be held accountable for their failures and now transparent lies?
Regards
I’ll go with Truthseeker (#2); I’d like to see the scientists’ names and emails published.
LB@43: Dissembling aside, what you are saying is that “by any means necessary”, right? That AGW is bad science, speciously “peer” reviewed, uncorroborated and in some cases fasified data, but that is okay with you because it is what you want it to be. Do I have that right?
By the by, if AGW is a function of human caused CO2 release, what would you have us do about it? Do you suggest closing down factories; how about shutting down coal-fired power plants? What will we run our electric cars on? And why is it necessary for developed nations to give money to third world/undeveloped nations? What will they do with all that confiscated money?
I despair of stopping the warmists. Obama has jumped wholeheartedly on the Gore bandwagon and pushes their case with a straight face. It’s just discouraging…they just keep popping up like whackamoles….
How do you know these alarmists are on shaky ground? Because they’re resorting to demeaning their opponents and calling them “screaming morons” and anti-science. You can tell they’re losing altitude because they’re flapping so hard. The skeptics aren’t creationists, they’re actual scientists.
The postmodernists tried to recruit Noam Chomsky on their side but he denounced them. As he stated, he could go to anybody he knew who was in advanced physics and ask him questions about his field and the physicists would try to explain the concepts to him in terms he could understand. When he asked the postmodernists to explain some of their obscure and murky concepts the postmoderns would just blow him off and suggest he was too dumb to understand. Chomsky may have an irrational hatred for the United States and Israel but he could see clearly when he was being snookered.
This suggests to me that ‘climate science’ is a lot more squishy than people let on, much more like sociology than physics. Even in physics and astronomy there are looming questions that are just not answered conclusively and nobody in those fields would think to call people who disagreed with their theories morons. Trying to suppress opposing views is really beyond the pale. The East Angelica guys should be denied the right to be called scientists.
This kind of snobbery is common in academia, science included.
There is a stereotype of scientists, that they are like Mr. Spock on Star Trek. Not so. Many are like a country-club Spock, with snobbishness multiplying the “logic” — end result is what this author experienced in Wisconsin.
But do not feel badly: they treat everybody that way, not just moms. It’s foolishness, but they are so smart, they cannot see their own foolishness.
Ray managed to arrange a written debate between a skeptic and an alarmist, both very famous scientists:
http://rayharvey.org/index.php/2010/01/dr-william-gray-and-dr-kevin-trenberth-debate-global-warming-part-1/
Part 2 of that debate here:
http://rayharvey.org/index.php/2010/01/dr-william-gray-and-dr-kevin-trenberth-debate-global-warming-part-2/
This is no joke. These World-worshipers are all Evolutionists. Evolution was the philosophical engine for the Nazis. Global Warming/Climate Change is entirely predicated on an Evolutionary worldview. It requires the belief of millions of years of earth history.
If you think you are sophisticated enough to merge Evolution and the account in Genesis you are dead wrong. If you accept Evolution you ARE one of them. Eventually.
The same conceit that we are witnessing in the Global Warming conspiracies is the same conceit that has upheld Evolution. Why are there NO conservatives challenging Evolution. It is also false science. Evolution is the Trojan Horse, and Global Warming indicates the battle. You are caught sleeping.
That is why I say you are one of them already if you accept Evolution. You’ve taken in the Trojan Horse. You’ve subverted your stronghold. Your foundation is an allegory. A myth. And now you are going to lose the battle!
Reject Evolution. It is worthless so-called science. It does NOT contribute to science. It is NOT essential in order to understand science. It is a real Trojan Horse. Good for nothing, and yet you take it in.
Funny you should mention Physics Pergolesi,
Here is what physisists say about AGW…
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf
Real Scientists.
Of course What I hear mostly from the Alarmists is that somehow Physics don’t apply to Climate Science, or quotations from RealClimate quoting Wikipedia regarding this report.
But I’ve talked with physics people at UPS (University of Puget Sound NOT the delivery company) who say the stuff is valid.
jd
The climate for lying about global warming has chilled considerably. Those guys must all be
charter members of the Frequent Liars Club.
Data manipulations, attacks on dissenters, plus so much more, and in anticipation of so much more yet to be revealed, shows all of us there is serious cause for doubt about this issue. One issue finally revealed is that there were peer-reviews of forecasts, models, scientific studies, & other Climate Change supporting data, that were conducted by the same fellow Climate Change promoters. What we had were fellow scientists backing up (or providing peer-review), of each others corrupt data. It became a circular review process where each one of a select group verified the data of the other members of the same group, so there was no outside or independent review of data.
The corruption of data & scientific study results, plus actual data collection failures, show all we cannot allow the draconian changes to laws, public policies, & imposition of huge taxes on many, until we have fully accredited independent review of their claims. That they will not even come to a local school to discuss the issues, shows that they may indeed have something to hide.
Note also Maurice Strong, a Canadian socialist tied to the UN, promoted using the Climate Change agenda to impose worldwide government under the UN & a taxation structure imposed on all nations to financially support the UN operations which would be independent of the influences of individual member states once implemented. Mr. Strong was a great promoter of a one world socialist government run by an academic elite who he felt were better able to understand issues and run government for the world. He felt most issues were too complex for average people to fully understand.
I say if they will not even debate at a local high school, their agenda is total bunk!
I too would like to see the names and emails of these scientists. Then a simple investigation of where they’re funds are coming from could shed a bit of light on the whole concept of who’s getting paid off.
I don’t know if any of you read Michael Crichton’s “State Of Fear” but it does a pretty fine job of using AGW alarmism as the driver of the storyline. It got pretty well clobbered by the “established” popular literature press when it was published in 2004 and it’s no big surprise that there wasn’t a blockbuster movie based upon it.
In “State of Fear” Crichton made two compelling social observations that in my experience, hadn’t been articulated with enough force:
1) We have witnessed several “movements” in the past that were derived from “accepted” scientific research and consensus; one very recent example was the the Eugenics craze in the early 20th century. Highly respected statesmen, scientists, and industrialists from most of the developed world agreed that there was a looming crisis based on the rapidly deteriorating human gene pool. Breeding out inferior genes (imbeciles, Jews, other racial/ethnic minorities) became the answer to save humanity. Of course Hitler’s Third Reich was the logical culmination of the Eurgenics movement and it had been utterly abandoned by the time the Nazis were defeated.
2) Crichton (via a tirade delivered by one of his characters that appears later in the book) explains that AGW as a social/political movement is primarily driven by the natural coalescing of interest between the political, legal and media/publishing sectors of society that DEPEND on a fearful populace for their power and stature.
What better way is there for a politician to acquire recognition and power than beating a drum for and then attempting to “solve” a crisis that could doom the planet?
Think of how much money can and has been made when the legal profession is able to place themselves in the position of suing for damages as redress for a catastrophic wrong – especially when the potential number of plaintiffs and deep-pocketed defendants is so limitless.
And of course there’s the news media. They work in an easy alliance with both politicians and lawyers; serving as the great megaphone that gets the word out to the populace. Nothing attracts more eyeballs than news of impending doom.
I’m confident AGW hysteria will flame out and be as discredited and forgotten as eugenics, phrenology, and witchcraft. How long it will take is anyone’s guess, but the events of the last few months tell me that the tide has turned.
I recently joined a Global Warming Discussion and Debate group on Facebook and had a very similar experience to yours. Very few were interested in actual debate. One member’s tactic was to loudly and forcefully throw all kinds of vulgar insults at any “denier” infidels who dared to show their faces to derail any discussion. He wouldn’t let up until he had driven them out.
They really do respond as a group of Muslim jihadists would if you questioned their beliefs.
Its not about them having the Courage of their Convictions’ its more about when will they have the ‘CONVICTIONS’ for their SCAMS as that is what needs to happen now. Return ALL the unjustified grants made to so called Scientists that were predicated on the AGW lies and PROSECUTE all the so called SCIENTISTS who actively deliberately LIED in order to get those grants.
Nothing matters to the AGW nutters. No facts will change their beliefs. They are as whacked out as creationists. Some people are just too ignorant to matter. That is OK, as technology progresses, Darwinism will remove those floundering in the shallow end of the gene pool.
All us rational types need to do is outlive them.
Like Luddites, in another generation or three they will have bred out of the Human race. Like the Luddites, no one will miss them.
Back in the early 19th century, “scientists” proved (using Math!) that it was impossible for the human body to move faster then 30MPH. It would fall apart. So anyone boarding a train was seen to have a death wish. Never underestimate the ignorance of scientists;
“The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys.” — Sir William Preece, chief engineer of the British Post Office, 1876.
Scientists can be a narrow minded and ignorant as any creationist;
“There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” — Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977.
Even those that should know better often don’t;
“Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax.” — William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist, 1899.
“With over 50 foreign cars already on sale here, the Japanese auto industry isn’t likely to carve out a big slice of the U.S. market.” — Business Week, August 2, 1968.
“There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.” — Albert Einstein, 1932.
“The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives.” — Admiral William Leahy, U.S. Atomic Bomb Project.
The AGW nutters will not change their minds. They will not be put in jail. The only rational thing to do with them is to keep them away from the keys to the vault and wait for them to die off. History will deal with them. As it did with the Luddites.
I agree — the fact that Isaac Newton defended his life’s work makes me suspect the theory of gravity.
Ditto for Copernicus and heliocentrism; Darwin and evolution; Pasteur and the germ theory of disease; Marie Curie and radioactivity; Ben Franklin and electricity; Marconi and radio waves; the Wright Brothers and human flight.
In fact, now that I think about, there isn’t a single scientific achievement that isn’t the the life’s work of some scientist defending it, suspiciously.
Ergo, we are screwed.
There is only one response to that. Real scientists do NOT fudge their data to support the theory. The only way data can be altered is if a bias is noted in a way that can be proven and confirmed. Otherwise, it’s a bad set of data and must be thrown away. Even then the process to clean up the data should be published and the raw data, made available.
Any one who fudges the data to make it fit the theory is a pseudo-scientist. That’s why when falsified data is found, the whole process, results, conclusions and derivative works are suspect until the whole thing is verified again from the beginning. Clearly such methodology is broken vis-a-vis AGW, because we are still expected to believe the result in the face of falsified research.
Start over. Open up the process. If the AGW supporters have faith in the theory, what are they afraid of? Time and transparency will prove it.
Seeing the comments here I think gives you your answer why credible climate scientists do not want to debate in the forum you provide. One comment after the next defaming professionals you’ve never met, without any evidence whatsoever.
It would be nothing but an old-fashion lynching, not a genuine debate.
Science is published and debated every day in respectable journals and institutions that have been around for centuries. When was the last time you picked up a copy of Nature or Science and tried to understand what is written? Perhaps if you would like to join in, start by writing a scientific article of your own, build your own models to show how the atmosphere responds to huge injections of carbon dioxide, have it peer-reviewed and published. Sacrifice your own working day to contribute to our understanding of climate. Who knows, maybe a small town Mum can throw out 100 years of climate science.
These scientists are just like you and me – regular people on middle-income salaries with families to support; expect unlike us for years they have been subjected to attacks by multi-billion dollar corporation-funded propaganda campaigns. Maybe if you think they are part of a big hoax you could provide some proof, rather than shooting your mouth off. That would show some true characters.
Your supporters were the ones who resorted to criminal activity – thieving 1000s of personal emails. And out of them the best you can get is a failure to respond to a FOI request (at a time when the University was being inundated with hundreds of requests every week – even the ICO advised them to ignore some of the requests). I’m sorry, there is only one side that is criminal here, and it’s not who you would like it to be.
The AGW debate has been had already had years ago – sorry if you missed it. It is now time to work out what to do about it. There is still much to debate on this matter. Carbon tax and cap+trade would not be necessary if people woke up to the damage we are causing to our fragile world. Maybe if you have spare time you could make some suggestions on how we can curb emissions without a tax or bureaucratic system?
There is a policy honorable conservatives can work for to address global warming. It is this:
Return revenues from special fossil fuel taxation to the people in equal shares.
These revenues are already very large, and, to me, seem to explain why governments are reluctant to issue permits for nuclear power station construction, and why a history of putatively defying one’s government’s putative wish to have such stations built often seems to lead to a career in the public sector. Fortunately some of these people, as they get older, seem to get the message that there are necks and millstones, and switch to supporting nuclear energy.
Dr. Hansen has recommended the equal-dividend approach for *new* fossil fuel tax revenues. I don’t think there should be any such new taxes because they would increase government’s conflict of interest; but dividing out the existing revenues would be very good.
Some of the pseudononymous posters above are no doubt on government stipends. Without otherwise divulging their identities, would they be willing to acknowledge that they are, in fact, so supported?
Out of every hundred dollars they get, there are a few fossil fuel tax-derived ones. When the dividing-out goes into effect, this part would dwindle to a few coins, because the rest would be divided among several other posters who now get no fossil fuel money. Good idea?
Typical.
Ask them to provide Proof that the questions we are asking have been debunked- no one shows up to defend the Hystericysts’ ide.
Instead they stop by to scream imprecations, exactly as Kim detailed.
Totally predictable. Which is something the UKMet is not even to 24 hours in advance with the weather… because REALITY does not fit the computer models for global warming.
With the latest support on Global Warming from Osama bin Laden……Invite him…….never know
We are NORTHWOODS PATRIOTS of Eagle River, Wi.. We were at this event and it proved very interesting, and it was well attended. We invited 220 schools, their teachers and school boards. It was sad that only one teacher, one school board member attended and no kids came. It was well advertized so you could not say that no one knew about it. That is if you don’t read the paper, listen to the radio. The school kids should of been encourged to attend, so they could of gotten both sides of the story and not just the falsehoods they are taught in school.
dear cpb
First off it is obvious you did not read post 39. That was FACT based.
Second, how much does Al Gore and George Soros pay you to drink the Koolaid.
Nature and Science Magazine often reports Scientific Papers on the Effects of Global Warming but that is not the same thing as Identifying The Cause of Global Warming. Standard Liberal Trick of Obfuscation.
However, after the Conspiracy revealed in the e-mails ( of which No Evidence Whatsoever exists that it was illegally hacked vs. Internally Released so you are now the pot calling the kettle black) shows that Edititors of such “Prestiegous” Magazines were hounded and fired for allowing alternate viewpoints into their magazines, makes your claims once again bogus.
Again, how much are you paid to spout this nonsense.
jd
Would love comments
Cheers
Ninad
http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/international/the-hottest-hoax-in-the-world
Recent comments from grist.org. Folks who are planning their next moves.
#####I’m curious to see if the Michael Brune and the Sierra Club re-examine its long-standing policy of not using civil disobedience, especially as it zeroes in an already successful coal campaign.
#####We must start living in alignment with our conscience within our selves.
We can make massive positive shifts in our outcome immediately with a basic fundamental shift in behavior called vegan.
#####“The most violent weapon on earth is the table fork.” Gandhi
##### In my opinion, the average American’s understanding of climate change, its causes and its consequences, is a mile wide and an inch deep.
##### I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, all this fixation on get-it-right, got-it-wrong is obscuring the real issue: the truth is what we define it to be, and the truth is that mankind is a scourge on the planet. The sooner we can limit the right to breed, the sooner the planet will recover. If glacier data is a little incorrect but helps that effort, then the data is true in all but a very narrow and clinical scientific sense.
Common people don’t really understand science. But they understand not having enough to eat and not being able to sit down on a too-crowded subway. if we can educate people not to reproduce there will be many seats and the fewer people will be happier. Indeed, as the capitalist economies of scale are reduced, the satisfaction from making your own clothes and embracing a low-carbon vegan diet will be so intense, reproduction will come to be seen in the same category as child abuse.
I yearn for the day when i might not have been born!
Rude and obnoxious behavior is the hallmark of those who are just faking it from the very beginning. “Don’t pay any attention to that man behind the screen.”
Folks who are tired of “algore science” and want the real scientific scoop on global-warming should watch this video: http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml
The video doesn’t have any of that “algore” greenie (or should that be “pinko”?) bs — it just gives you the straight science that “An Inconvenient Truth” glossed over.
To cbp:
Yes, I’m sure in your mind the debate ended long ago and it’s that kind of smug blindness that destroys your credibility. Even more revealing is this statement from you:
“…if people woke up to the damage we are causing to our fragile world”
You obviously know nothing about the history of our planet, as fragile it is certainly anything but.
Good job cbp. You fearlessly entered the lion’s den and hopefully somebody might take time to think. Or maybe crack a physics book.
Good job cbp. You proved our point, along with linus van pelt and Charles bullshit.
Now, any one of you, please answer even ONE question that has been posed to you. Prove to us that the ‘science is settled,’ and that not ONE new piece of information or data has come to light since it was settled. Please explain to us how thousands of peer-reviewed papers are NOT proving your gods wrong.
Thanks for the advice, encouragement and even the grammar corrections (a weak spot of mine). During our Climate Change Debate yesterday we held open two 2 empty seats, signifying the unwillingness of advocates to engage on the subject. Hopefully this stems from the realization that it is only a matter of time until the curtain falls on their whole charade.
Invitations went out to over 220 high schools, several local school boards, teachers, and other area notables. Actually in attendance were 1 school board member, 2 teachers and 1 student. About 150 other interested citizens also attended. As far as media were concerned – 1 local NBC affiliate, 2 independent reporters, and a few bloggers. The local paper didn’t show up. Nor did any representative or faculty member of the events host location: Northland Pines High School in Eagle River. No math teacher that thought an Astrophysicist from Harvard might have something to say worth listening to. No science teacher that thought a lecture given by the head of Climatology at the University of Delaware was worth their time, despite the fact that they had traveled across the country to give it in their own facility. These people are simply pathetic, and deserve to be recognized as such.
So thankful am I to all who helped with the event. The Northwoods Patriot group that worked so hard and most especially to Dr. Soon and Dr. Legates who spent an entire weekend of their lives traveling to a small outpost in the Midwest to explain why their main concern is not only that the true story on climate change is being manipulated but most importantly, that scientific enquiry is being compromised.
I am very thankful to all who helped make the event possible. The Northwoods Patriot group worked very hard to make this a success, and without their efforts it would not have been possible. I especially want to thank Dr. Soon and Dr. Legates, who took a weekend out of their lives to travel to a small outpost in the Midwest and explain to us the basis of their convictions. Perhaps the biggest travesty of all is that besides the evidence of data on climate change being manipulated, brilliant men have to take time away from their other endeavors to fight for the integrity of basic scientific enquiry.
After having the honor of spending a bit of time with such brilliant minds as Dr. Soon and Dr. Legates, it is clear that theirs is a gift that comes with much responsibility. Their level of intelligence that is so clearly above the masses is the reason why mankind advances. Shared with their colleagues all over the world, it is their job to discover life’s secrets and the mysteries of our planet for those who will come after us. Shameful is the fact that such a large segment of gifted people have sold out on their potential success for grant dollars and job security. They have lost their quest for discovery and settled for a mediocre place in history. So will be their legacy!
Getting the press coverage on this story (like right here on pajamasmedia) is what made the whole effort a total success! Nationwide people are finding their side has “NO COMMENT” Spread the word! Post this story everywhere! END THIS SHAM!
As for their names, I have them. Maybe I should put it out there, not sure. I am just a little fry and in the days to come it is going to get pretty ugly for their side of this debacle. I will think about it!
NEWSFLASH: Best thing yet!!! In attendance were some who supported global warming. I commend them for coming and one in particular was a neighbor. He stopped by today to thank us and let us know that he had tried to get others to attend. He too was embarrassed by the lack of attendance from those in our community and for the first time is considering the thought that perhaps the motives behind all of this climate change may not be rooted in true goodness. Most importantly was the handshake we shared and the step we agreed to take to mend the bridges that have divided us here in our small town. Left/Right it is a tool that is being used to conquer America. Get rid of that and the prospects for regaining the strength and integrity we once had will be good.
Kim Simac
Otter:
Science is never settled — that’s a straw man you’re putting up there. But it is useful and instructive, ya know, we still use old Isaac to get to the moon. Scientists don’t want AGW, who would? They just call ‘em as they see ‘em. The insult that scientists are being paid off could be turned around on you. You might be getting a check from ExxonMobil, and I’m sorry to say you can’t prove me wrong.
26. DrCrimwitt:
Conservatives (Right wingers, Republicans) are liars. That is the heart and soul of Conservatism! They have nothing bigger than themselves to believe in. Truth is to them what they believe it to be. Right wingers believes themselves incapable of lying no matter if the evidence suggest otherwise. No questioning them because they are the anointed ones…all others are benighted. Out of thin air they make up numbers and statistics to support their contentions, expect all others to believe what they tell us and then refuse to divulge where this information comes from, telling the benighted that “we wouldn’t understand.” You are just suppose to believe it. To the Conservatives any lie that advances their cause is, by definition, the truth.
See how easy that is? And it’s all true!
91. Otter:
Are you saying it’s settled? Are you saying it is absolutely untrue? Sounds like you are.
34. Bill Perron:
I’m not a scientist but I saw some on t.v. a couple of times, and even met one once, I believe that entitles me to some grant money to fund a pseudo scientific research project ?
Clown business down?
I am STILL waiting for any one of you to prove to me that new science is not demonstrating problems with the ‘settled’ science of agw. For example, why does michael mann’s Hockey Stick not show the Midieval Warm Period OR the Little Ice Age, both of which deviate quite a bit away from what his temperature reconstruction shows?
Please explain to me how that is. If YOU are claiming the science is settled, then show me the proof that the MWP and LIA never happened.
It seems that quite a number of commenters here have NEVER READ ANY SCIENCE!
FYI Science isn’t a democracy. Not all opinions are equally valid.
Would someone explain the comparative merits of the opinions of:
a) A person who has read the science and then drawn conclusions
b) A person whose only knowledge is derived from Fox News & CNN
c) A scientist who has a PhD in the subject and who has studied the subject for decades and published in science citation index peer-reviewed journals.
–
Reading science is relatively easy, and quite a lot of it is available to download.
For example the link below is for the ice-core study that shows the temperatures and CO2 concentration in the atmosphere over the last 800,000 years.
High-resolution carbon dioxide concentration record 650,000 – 800,000 years before present Lǖthi et al. (2008)
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7193/pdf/nature06
949.pdf
or
http://tinyurl.com/ycnovk7
The current CO2 concentration and plot is here: http://co2now.org/
Kimberly~ Keep up the good work!
Prediction: When the dam finally bursts and the Truth becomes known even to the ‘mainstream’ media, I suspect we’ll never hear from the likes of linus van pelt or skreechiks again. No apologies, no admittance they were wrong. They will rationalize things however it suits them, and move on to the next ‘crisis’ even as their climate gods go to jail, or run for countries that can hide them, or, in some cases, end up having fatal ‘accidents’ or mysteriously disappearing.
After all, once they understand they’ve been played for fools their entire lives by people they trusted and believed in….
@JB
>> First off it is obvious you did not read post 39. That was FACT based.
No sorry I didn’t read post 39. I don’t make a habit of reading every single comment on every minor blog post that I read. So sue me.
But seeing as though you brought it up, I read the post and notice that it has a number of statements that are not as factual as you would like them to be.
>> “The deniers didn’t put a WWF article in a report that was supposed to consist ONLY of Peer Reviewed Science.”
This statement is not fact based. The IPCC follow standards which can be found here: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ipcc-principles/ipcc-principles-appendix-a.pdf
Please see page 14, “Procedure for using non-published/non-peer-reviewed sources in IPCC reports”.
These standards have been available since 1999 (amended in 2003), long before the AR4 was published. A lot of what you are reading nowadays the media is pushing as though it is news that has ‘recently come to light’, which is incredibly misleading.
The WWF has been contributing a lot of its own money towards research. This is good and necessary research being funded largely through donations from the concerned public. It is only natural that some of this is referenced by the report.
>> “The deniers weren’t forced to admit that they included it for the sole purpose of Forcing Government Action.”
This accusation is not fact based, although you are not to blame for the mistake. This is related to an ongoing scandal which has become known as “Rosegate” and revolves around the the misquoting of scientist Murari Lal by soon-to-be-ex-Daily Mail-writer David Rose. Please see this link: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/01/rosegate_scandal_grows.php
Unfortunately this is just another in a long string of misquoting and misrepresentation of science by certain sections of the media. I would be very careful about receiving your science news through politically-biased second-hand channels such as the Daily Mail.
>> “The deniers weren’t the ones aware that this FALSE information was included in the Body of Evidence BEFORE the Copenhagen Summit.”
Again, this is deliberate misinformation from David Rose: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/01/rosegate_david_rose_caught_mis.php
>> “Climate Change is what you call Global Warming when your Global Warming Summit/Conference/Protest is Snowed Out.”
I believe you are referring to the old myth that the name was changed from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change”. Unfortunately, this too is not fact based.
For a start, one of the seminal papers on climate change is from 1956: “The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change”, by Glibert Plass.
This is an interesting paper because it has proven surprisingly accurate given the primitive knowledge of the 50s: it predicted a warming of 1C from 1900-2000 (actual warming was 0.7C) and it predicted CO2 would rise by 30% by 2000 (it rose by 37%).
Furthermore, “IPCC” stands for “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change”, and was named thusly in 1988; so it is obvious that the name has been “Climate Change” for at least 20 years, probably closer to 50 years.
>> Nature and Science Magazine often reports Scientific Papers on the Effects of Global Warming but that is not the same thing as Identifying The Cause of Global Warming.
You are somewhat correct here – this ground was covered a long time ago, so recently scientists don’t really spend much time identifying the cause of global warming.
Nature and Science have extremely strict peer-review processes – the strictest in the world. Scientists open and bottle of champagne and throw a party when their article is published in Nature – it is very prestigous.
Research that is still examining the general causes of global warming is no longer of particular interest and rarely turns up much interesting any more, which is perhaps why it doesn’t get much space in Nature or Science.
That being said, you can easily search through the abstracts of Nature journal yourself and uncover plenty of articles that do deal with the cause of global warming:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=site%3Anature.com+abstract+carbon+dioxide+cause+warming
I found at least three just in the first few pages of results.
I’m not sure if there’s an easy way online to search through older archives of Nature (looking at issues from the 70s and 80s, when this type of research was still being conducted, would be interesting). Best to head down to the library.
>> “how much does Al Gore and George Soros pay you to drink the Koolaid.”
>> “how much are you paid to spout this nonsense.”
I am a computer science working in the car industry. I never got round to seeing Al Gore’s movie and I didn’t know who George Soros was until just then, when I wikipediaed him.
If the alarmist claims regarding cap+trade destroying the economy were to come true, I may well lose my job, but I know that job’s come-and-go but we only get one shot at life (I also don’t think that cap+trade will destroy the economy).
I am interested in climate change partly because it is just interesting stuff. The science is interesting and the political and social impact that it is having is interesting.
Also, it’s fun debating people and it’s fun looking at ways to improve the way I live my life to minimize my impact on the world – e.g. riding my bike, insulating my house properly,
getting rid of the TV… you know, all the evil things us lefties like to plot when we’re not sipping lattes.
I also have a young niece who was just born to my sister and I think how lucky this little kid is to be living in my country (I don’t live in America by the way), as 20 years ago
we were refugees from a country that is now destroyed. I’ve seen catastrophe and disaster – I know it can happen. I want this little kid to have a good future, but science is
telling us that it could be tough times ahead. Even if the chance of a collapse is small, I still believe it is wise to try our best to avoid it.
>> of which No Evidence Whatsoever exists that it was illegally hacked vs. Internally Released
It doesn’t matter if it was internally released – it would still be illegal and consider theft under UK law (and US law for that matter).
>> … Edititors of such “Prestiegous” Magazines were hounded and fired for allowing alternate viewpoints into their magazines
This is simply not true, if you are refering to the incident I think you are.
In fact the editor-in-chief resigned in protest at the publication of Soon and Baliunas’s paper (resigned along with half the board)! The editor-in-chief complained that he was pressured by skeptics to publish the paper in the first place!
Think about that for a second: people actually resigning from their job because they felt so strongly that science was being skewed and misrepresented.
The editor behind the publication was not fired, although he perhaps should have been because he destroyed the reputation of the journal by publishing such an error-filled paper.
Regardless, I don’t know what is so unusual about the fact that respected professionals are sometimes called upon to exert their influence in hiring/firing/managerial/political decisions. This takes place in every single business, university, or any other enterprise you care to name. I hardly think there’s anything unusual about it. It’s disingenuous to somehow pretend it’s an offence.
@MisterH
>> “You obviously know nothing about the history of our planet, as fragile it is certainly anything but.”
You are right that the planet itself is pretty robust, sorry if I was generalizing. The issue is of course the people, animals and plants who live on the planet. History has demonstrated that the universe cares little for us poor living things and extinction can come rapidly and unexpectedly. Or is that a viking riding a dodo through my vegetable patch?
@Otter
>> “Prove to us that the ’science is settled’”
It’s not settled, but we have limited scientific resources to investigate everything all at once, therefore our taxpayer money, scientific minds and scientific tools need to shift to the areas of highest uncertainty. That human’s carbon dioxide emissions are causing warming is now of very low uncertainty. The research has shifted to more urgent matters: what are the specifics about will happen in the future? what should we do about it? how can we deal with it, without busting the economy?
Here’s a good article regarding the science being settled: http://tinyurl.com/ya5c9dv (quote, “It’s not settled, it’s unsettling”)
@Otter
>> “Please explain to us how thousands of peer-reviewed papers are NOT proving your gods wrong.”
I’m not quite sure what you are asking here. All the information required is in the peer-reviewed papers. Please begin with them.
The IPCC report is supposed to be a survey of scientific literature. I agree that parts of it have been written poorly, but a lot of it is written quite well. Remember that it involves the work of thousands of authors. I certainly can’t vouch for all of them, but most of them are pretty good at what they do! I’ve worked on some government projects before which had four or five people working on the same team – and those projects were riddled with difficulties but at the end of the day, the projects were completed and a lot of good use was made of the results. You might be surprised how much useful stuff get’s completed even with a lot of errors along the way!
Most of the references to ‘non-peer-reviewed’ literature being scrounged up by the media are in the second report. This is because the second report deals with the long term impacts of climate change and so it is natural that the science will be less certain in this section.
The final section is written for the layman and policy makers. I agree it has some political bias in it which personally I would have rather they avoided. Be aware though that the political bias runs both ways – there are sections that are overly conservative (the section on sea level rise being the most well known of these).
The first section is the strongest as it deals with observed effects of an already changing climate. I urge you to read it with an open mind.
@Otter
>> “Now, any one of you, please answer even ONE question that has been posed to you.”
I have answered all the questions asked of me. Please respond courteously, refraining from school-yard-insults and with references if possible.
It’s hard to work out whether some of the people here are posting anti-science opinions because they’ve been genuinely misled, or whether some might be Denial Industry stooges.
While the overwhelming majority of scientists are scientists because they love science, there is evidence that a small number of scientists were recruited to give the fossil-fuel industry the sort of science they couldn’t get for free, so they had to
buyfund the bestshillsscientists that money could buy.Here’s a link that shows that not all science and not all scientists are objective:
ExxonMobil learned from the Tobacco Industry that if you couldn’t beat the science, then you could confuse the public by lying. And that’s what’s still happening.
API memos are included ….Victory Will Be Achieved When
Average citizens “understand” (recognize) uncertainties in climate science; recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the “conventional wisdom”
Media “understands” (recognizes) uncertainties in climate science
Media coverage reflects balance on climate science and recognition of the validity of viewpoints that challenge the current “conventional wisdom”
Industry senior leadership understands uncertainties in climate science, making them stronger ambassadors to those who shape climate policy
Those promoting the Kyoto treaty on the basis of extent science appears to be out of touch with reality….
….Identify, recruit and train a team of five independent scientists to participate in media outreach. These will be individuals who do not have a long history of visibility and/or participation in the climate change debate. Rather, this team will consist of new faces who will add their voices to those recognized scientists who already are vocal….
a) http://tinyurl.com/wxd7x
–
Here’s another
Quote:
..,Disputing this contention are climatologists, meteorologists, and astrophysicists like Richard Lindzen, William Gray, Fred Singer, Roy Spencer Patrick Michaels, Robert Balling and Craig Idso and the 17,000 signatories to Dr. Arthur Robinson’s Petition Project…,
…,There are other groups that are interested in the issue of global warming and the concerns about its costs. Koch industries is working with other large corporations, including AEP and the Southern Company on possibly financing a film that would counteract ‘An Inconvenient Truth’. Koch has also decided to finance a coalition that very likely will be administered throughout the National Association of Manufacturers. The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) has been running two ads in ten states that were financed by General Motors and the Ford Motor Company. CEI has a director on climate change and other employees working on the issue. We have met with Koch, CEI and Dr. Michaels and they meet among themselves periodically to discuss their activities…,
b) http://tinyurl.com/ywppbm
–
Now if anyone would like to compare the names in a) and compare them with b) and provide an entirely innocent explanation why they turn up again and again like bad pennies, I would be most interested.
Note
1) The Oregon Petition [mentioned in b) as the Petition Project] was part funded by the ExxonMobil Funded George Marshall Institute.
2) The ”film that would counteract ‘An inconvenient Truth”’ mentioned in b), is obviously ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’. And of course some of the names in a) & b) are there again! What a surprise!
Folks, if you are looking to take on Amoeba, arm yourselves first.
Watch the video (link below) that shows all of the science that “Fat Albert” Gore tried to hide from you in “An Inconvenient Truth”.
Please watch this video so that you can avoid the traps that Amoeba is setting for you with his debating tricks.
Get the REAL truth, not the “inconvenient” truth.
Video link here: http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml
How true and how sad! The dam IS bursting and they will do just what you say, Otter. In just a short time the next crisis will be born and it will be the talk in every American home. Then because of the certain doom, billions will need to be allotted to scientists and governmental orgs. to assess and determine just how to save the world, yet again!
Wow, it’s early Monday morning and listen to me…. I need a vacation!
I am trying to figure out just how to address the schools here in Wisconsin. It seems they were all too busy to attend. I think I am going to ask to look over the curriculum of all science, environmental, political sciences classes. While I am at it I may as well look at history too. Any advice out there?
DO you know what??? On the bulletin board of this school though while I was looking to find if info was even posted on our event, there was an “anti-bully” poster printed by no other than our safe school czars group Kevin Jennings GSLEN. Now go figure! I thought GSLEN material was not going to be in our schools?
@69: So that’s your reference to “physics”? That foolish article has been so discredited so widely that I’m amazed that you haven’t distanced yourself from it, if only to maintain some marginal semblance of credibility. Start here and branch out. The mere citing of such a flawed article on your part does not necessarily mean you’re incorrect in your view, but it certainly points in that direction.
In my previous post #101 I mentioned ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’.
Those involved were: Nigel Lawson [Lord Lawson]; James Shikwati; Paul Driessen; Patrick Moore; Nigel Calder; Piers Corbyn; Dr Philip Stott; Dr Tim Ball; Dr Frederick Singer; Patrick Michaels; Dr Willie Soon; Dr Nir Shaviv; Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen; Syun-ichi Akasofu; Ian Clark; Richard Lindzen; Paul Reiter; John Christy ; Dr Roy Spencer; Carl Wunsch.
Now it has been shown that Professor Carl Wunsch was deceived by the programme makers and he was quoted out of context.
Presumably the
shillsother individuals were quite happy with their appearances in TGGWS.If you want to learn about the deceits used in TGGWS, you can find full details here:
http://tinyurl.com/y9e8l5g
You will note the overlap in names with a) and b) in my post #101.
Red herring anyone?
Remember when responding to Amoeba that The Alarmists never tell the whole truth! This video exposes shoddy MSM reporting of Climategate.
And to clarify… I am against bullying, it is just if GLSEN can post their views in our schools, I think we should post posters saying “Hey Kids… Global Warming is a Hoax… Follow the money! Or some other great slogan to direct kids to begin to think for themselves and investigate the info being taught in our schools. Now we cannot even trust our schools… this is bad!
CBP == Sponsored by Soros or ACORN
No longer any doubt in my mind.
The anti-science, lies, venom and malicious allegations directed at prominent scientists who dare to publish science that is unacceptable to certain industries, some political ideologies and religious beliefs must be turning-off American youngsters who would have become scientists.
Other countries like China and India are already taking advantage of the anti-scientific feelings in the US and some scientists have already left the US. In future there is no reason to believe the US will be able to rely upon importing scientists from overseas.
Since the future prosperity of the US depends upon science and technology. It is an inevitable, but logical conclusion that anti-science and the actions associated with it are anti-American.
Individuals who spread lies and malicious allegations against scientists must be called-out and shown for what they are – anti-American, traitors, who are undermining the future of the US.
The worst of the bunch are those who accept money to lie and undermine science. They are undermining the future of the US for thirty pieces of silver.
One doesn’t have to look very far to see anti-science=anti-Americanism in the guise of unfounded ad hominems and accusations of malfeasance against prominent scientists.
Example: use ‘find in page’ to locate references to ‘Michael Mann’
I really am sorry for you and for those kids who would be able to learn so much from witnessing a dabate on a subject which has received such worldwide attention. They deserve better. They’re future will certainly be affected by this issue and may likely be dictated by it.
It is a terribly sad set of circumstances which the green scientists have assisted in creating but it is truly our future that will suffer because of it.
@104 Rob,
Your warmist article claims Gerlich & Tscheushner are wrong because the average temperature of the earth’s surface would be -18 deg. C (-0.4 deg. Fahrenheit) without the GHG effect which G&T disprove. Any skeptical mind would consider the possibility that we are at -18 deg. Celsius and the temperature measurements are wrong. The UHI effect could easily account for the difference. And we know the NASA warmists have been removing the cold stations.
And it has been pretty cold recently.
Coherent arguments are just an excuse for fat Goreists to impose a global government.
Seems to me there is a huge amount of effort being put into the comments I’ve read so far. The only way to fight Science is with Science. So for those who have different opinions based upon facts, get those Science papers written using you own ‘non-jigged’ data and get them accepted for publication in the top science journals.
Guaranteed, if you could ‘blow these scientists away’ with a new way of understanding / accounting for the changes we see in the world, you will be Nobel bound, for sure!
Bottom line for those of us who are not scientists, the question of who is correct will be answered in the fullness of time. Either the world will warm or it will not.
If the world does not warm and we do nothing, we will be happy.
If the world does not warm and we prepare as if it would, then we will be poorer but still be able to enjoy this wonderful gift from God.
If the world does warm and we prepare for it then we will at least survive with hopes for a future change back to the normal world of today.
If the world warms and we do not prepare, we are lost. God help us. Every night when I pray, I pray we never end up here.
I for one hope for the best but I think that humanity, as a whole, must prepare for the worst just like anyone who is in the path of a hurricane.
Just because the science of weather forecasting is not settled or even correct means we should do nothing to prepare for a hurricane aiming for us? The people posting to this site, and I have read all the posts so far, are a sensible lot. They would never give such advise to people in the path of a hurricane.
Prepare for the worst; hope for the best.
Says Gord, “If the world does not warm and we prepare as if it would, then we will be poorer …”
Actually, we won’t. Recent natural gas prices are over $5 per million BTU, but the most recent uranium price is $0.1975 per million BTU. Also, natural gas pipelines have killed many on more than one occasion, as has carbon monoxide resulting from the use of this fuel, but no-one has ever been harmed by a shipment of nuclear fuel, nor by a cache of spent nuclear fuel.
@JB, in reply to comment #100:
>> CBP == Sponsored by Soros or ACORN
>> No longer any doubt in my mind.
Excuse me, you’ve never met me and have no idea who I am but you think you can scry into my life, based on one comment?
I spent a long time writing a detailed response to your questions and that’s the best you can come up with?
This is the exact reason that the climate scientists refused to debate at your tea-bagging party: too many people are not interested in genuine debate.
I gave you references, detailed arguments, pointed you to evidence and refrained from ad hominem attacks as is required by the guidelines of this comment board. All you can do is throw it back in my face with nonsense accusations? I’m sorry, but that’s just disgusting.
@G.R.L. Cowan
In regards to nuclear, many of us think that nuclear is part of the solution to global warming.
Please see these comments by prominent global-warming activists:
From James Hansen : http://bigthink.com/ideas/17891
From Joe Romm : http://climateprogress.org/2009/03/26/full-global-warming-solution-350-450-ppm-technologies-efficiency-renewables/
From Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209.html
This is a real debate that is taking place amongst both activists and scientists.
Personally I believe that limited and careful use of nuclear is a good option for the United States, but only in conjunction with other more appropriate technologies, baring in mind that nuclear plants take many years before they even compensate for their own power usage.
@G.R.L. Cowan
Ah I realised misunderstood your comment – you appear to be in full of support of using nuclear to take action against climate change and even mentioned Hansen further up
Silly me
What I think all you denialists should do is pool your money and start your own universities like the creationists did. Then when your kids hit 22 with a Science diploma from Northwoods Tea Party and Right Wing science university they can get jobs washing cars or some such because they will be worthless.
You folks think you get your own reality? OK, fine. Prove us wrong. But not on our dime. Until then you have nothing and especially, no valid science, to back you up. The glaciers are still melting, the arctic sea ice is retreating, rain patterns are changing and CO2 causes atmosphere’s to retain infrared radiation.
And whose dime has this whole charade been on up to now? Did you get a free ride to Copenhagen like so many important people did on the taxpayer’s dime? Is there really a university coming to the Northwoods? If it is true that is good news for us!
So you ask some scientist to come and “debate” you on global warming and they say no and you think its a cover up? Seriously? Why on earth would any scientist take the time to travel to debate someone from the Tea Party, considering what your funders and founders are doing to our environment? What possible purpose would they have to spend their valuable time on this publicity stunt?
The better question is, since you think they have so much to hide, what do YOU have to hide by not debating Jim Holperin? You were at horse camp? why did you not suggest and offer a date that you were available for? You are running for public office and you owe it to everyone to reveal who you really are, what you agenda really is and to do it in front of your possible constituents. But you keep running away, just like you say you won’t.
I have no doubt the scientists could barely take you seriously and thats why they said no.
You made several fine points there. I did a search on the topic and found the majority of persons will consent with your blog.
I have gone ahead and generated a website link back to your internet site from one of my customers asking for it. We have now used your website page Web link: %BLOGURL% as well as webpage name: %BLOGTITLE% to make sure that you get the right anchor text. Should you would care to take a look at where your hyperlink has been positioned, feel free to e mail me at: %EMAIL%. Kudos, Khalid. I would recommend this web page as well: %WEBSITE%
Gday! I’m Paul and i come right here occasionally and i really have to mention I’m just surprised all the time. I stumbled upon a really good news bulletin post which pleased me today and i desire to share it with you %WEBSITE%. Nevertheless, impressive article.
You do have a point there and My wife and I like the way in which decided to go with the title %BLOGTITLE%, it truly focuses on the point.
Nice piece of writing, I just really enjoy your own writing personality and i feel you bring up good issues. This particular post ‘%BLOGTITLE%’ I enjoyed the best. Keep up the good work. Mack out.
For starters I want to congratulate you on this this high quality write-up %BLOGTITLE% and furthermore , I’d like to strongly recommend this particular additional page that I found out impressing %WEBSITE%. Thanks a lot, Natalie!
I�ve gone ahead and added %BLOGURL% at StumbleUpon and so my best friends can easily see it too. I pretty much used %BLOGTITLE% as the entry title in my Twitter bookmark, because I thought if it’s enough for you to identify your blog article that, then chances are you would choose to view it added the same way.
The foundation of your own writing whilst appearing realistic at the beginning, really didn’t settle down completely with me personally later. Somewhere within the sentences you were able to make me a believer sadly only for a very short while. I however have trouble with your own leaps in judgement and you might do well to help complete those holes. When you essentially attain that, I could possibly surely end up being satisfied.
For a start. I wish to say: it�s an outstanding blog!I�ve got a question, if you don�t mind, I was curious the way you center yourself and organize your ideas before writing. I have difficulties clearing my head, getting all of my opinions together in regards to a particular topic and then getting them out. I do like writing, yet this appears like the first 10 to 15 min are wasted just trying to figure out how to begin. Any suggestions or hints? Thanks a lot
Greetings Fella, That which you just crafted here have actually me fascinated close to the final word, and I also must definitely say to you I rarely read the entire post of blogs as I usually got bored and tired of the gibberish that is presented to me on a daily basis and just end up checking out the pictures and the headlines etc. But your tag-line and the first paragraphs were exceptional and it instantly got me hooked. Commending you for a job well done in right here. Thanks, %NAME%.
I presume your site will surely look far better and easy on the eyes if its colored PaleVioletRed. Hope you don’t mind the suggestion
, Nancy.
Normally I do not read post on blogs, although I would like to say that this write-up very forced me to check out and do it! Your writing style has been amazed me. Thank you, quite great page. Thanks, Florence.
Impressive, incredible blog layout! How many years have you been blogging for? you made blogging look easy. The overall look of your site is great, as well as the content! Thanks, Maria
Aw, this was a really nice post. In idea I would want to put in writing like this additionally ?taking time and actual effort to make a very good content?however what can I say?I procrastinate alot and not at all appear to get one thing done. Claudia.
Wonderful blog! I found it while browsing on Yahoo News. Do you have any tips on how to get listed in Yahoo News? I�ve been trying for a while however , I never seem to get there! Thanks, Victor.
Hello! I know this is kinda off subject however , I�d figured I�d ask. Would you be attracted in trading links or maybe guest writing a blog content or vice-versa? My website goes over a lot of the same subjects as yours and i also feel we could greatly benefit from each other. If you�re fascinated feel free to send me an email. I look forward to hearing from you! Wonderful blog by the way! Jane.
We don�t assume I�ve in no way learned anything such as this just before. So excellent to discover an individual by incorporating authentic applying for grants this particular topic. I truly we appreciate you starting it. This site is something that is needed on the internet, somebody with a little little bit creativity.
I ran across your blog�s link put up by a friend on Facebook. Thank you for putting useful info on the world wide web. It�s hard to get these things nowadays.
I�d continually strive to be revise with new websites for this internet site , preserved to help my personal favorites !
I�ll be sharing this post with my wife. Thanks!
Pretty solid page. I recently came across your internet site and wanted to notify i have actually loved reading your notions. Anyway I�ll be coming back and i also hope you post over again soon.
I have been meaning to read this and just never obtained a chance. It�s an issue that I�m really motivated in, I simply started reading and I�m glad I did. You�re a fantastic blogger, one of the best that I�ve seen. This weblog undoubtedly has some facts on issue that I just now wasn�t aware of. Thanks for bringing this stuff to light.
It�s a pity you don�t have a donate button! I�d surely donate to this brilliant blog! I guess for now i�ll settle for book-marking and adding your RSS feed to my Google account. I look forward to fresh updates and will share this blog with my Facebook group. Talk soon!
Thanks for the info, I require to bookmark your website for my reference.
Random Google results can occasionally lead to great personal blogs in this way. You�re performing a good job, and we share lots of ideas. I’ll come back soo for sure. Julie
I am actually loving the theme/design of the weblog. Do you encounter virtually any internet browser match ups issues? A couple of my own blog audience possess complained about my internet site not really working correctly in Explorer however looks excellent inside Opera. Do you have any kind of tips to aid fix this challenge?
Really cool post, highly informative and professionally posted. Good Job!
My dear amazing benefits! an incredible post. Many thanks!
Please let me know if you�re looking for a author for your site. You have some really great articles and i also feel I might be a good asset. If you ever want to take some of the load off, I�d absolutely love to write some material for your website in exchange for a link back to mine. Please shoot me an e-mail if compelled. Kudos!
Thank you for one more fantastic blog. Where else might one get that sort of information penned in such an ideal way? I have a presentation that i am presently performing on, and i also have been probing for such information instead.
I like that which you guys are up also. Such clever work and reporting! Keep up outstanding operates fellas We have included you guys to be able to my blogroll. It looks like it�ll improve the value of my web site
Spot on with this write-up, I truly suppose this web site needs far more consideration. I�ll most likely come again to learn more, thanks for that info.
Howdy would you mind letting me know which webhost you�re working with? I�ve loaded your blog post in 3 completely different web browsers and i preferably should say this blog loads a lot faster then most. Can you strongly suggest a good web hosting provider at a fair price? Many thanks, I appreciate it!
Howdy! I simply would want to give a huge thumbs up for the great info you will have here on this post. I shall be coming again to your weblog for extra soon.
Odd this post is totaly unrelated to what I was searching google for, still it was indexed at the first page. I guess your doing something right if Google likes you enough to put you on the first page of a non related search.
My nephew suggested I could like this web site. He was once totally right. This submit actually made my day. You can�t believe simply how much time I had spent looking for this information! Thank you!
Does your website have a contact page? I�m having trouble locating it and yet, I�d like to shoot you an e-mail. I�ve got some suggestions for your web site you might be involved in hearing. Either way, great blog and i also look forward to seeing it improve over time.
Awesome weblog! Is your concept custom made or perhaps do you obtain this from somewhere? A style just like yours with some easy tweeks would really help make my blog stand out. You should inform me where you received your own design, I’d personally appreciate it.
I like the useful info an individual supply inside your content articles. I�ll book mark your own weblog and appearance again the following frequently. I�m very positive I�ll discover plenty of new things within you! All the best in the years ahead!
With havin so much content and articles do you ever run into any problems of plagorism or copyright infringement? My site has a lot of unique content I�ve either authored myself or outsourced but seems like a lot of it is popping it up all over the web without my permission. Do you know any solutions to help protect against content from being stolen? I�d definitely appreciate it.
I had been merely trying to find these details for quite a while. Soon after 6 hours of ongoing Googleing, at last I obtained this with your site. I wonder what’s the not enough Yahoo method that will not rank such a useful websites within top of the list. Generally the top sites tend to be packed with rubbish.
Quite practical stuff, overall I otherwise this could happen is really really worth the take note of, many thanks.
Hi! I�m at work browsing your blog from my new iphone 4! Just wanted to say I love reading your blog site and look forward to all your posts! Keep up the outstanding work!
Do you have a facebook fan page? I looked for one on facebook however , could not discover one, I would personally really like to change into a fan!
Do you have a twitter fan page? I looked for one on twitter though could not discover one, I would personally really like to change into a fan!
My personal notebook passed on while i ended up being looking at this website last time I used to be the following. And also for the last two times My partner and i are actually seeking this type of site, so thrilled I ran across that all over again!
eb
Currently it sounds like Movable Type is the best blogging platform out there right now. (from what I�ve read) Is that what you�re using on your website?
It�s hard to find knowledgeable people on this subject matter however you sound like you know what you�re talking about! Thanks
A remarkable reveal, I have merely discussed this kind of write-up having a friend who had been performing a tiny investigation on this topic. And he actually obtained myself breakfast as a reward for finding that regarding him or her.
Therefore i want to spin and rewrite that: Thnx for that offer and up the great work!
The text from this amazing blog site is extremely challenging.
This particular point seriously fascinates me personally. I feel a book can be written about the situation. I appreciate sharing your ideas with us.
Having a lot of written content have you ever come across any troubles connected with plagiorism or copyright intrusion? My own web site has a lot of unique user generated content I�ve either authored myself or outsourced however it seems a lot of it is actually popping it up all over the web without my authorization. Are you aware any ways of safeguard against content from being taken? I�d absolutely be thankful.
Your website seems to be simply really good. I wanted to ask if you may well e-mail me some thoughts on how you’ve made it occur. I am very appreciative.
Looking at most of these responses I can�t cease questioning the reason why there are so many offtopic. It�s like every person has Hyperactivity or something, haha.
I really like how you address the actual issue on this website. You made several good points I have to go along with. I did some search and seems that a lot of people write about the very same opinion.
I’m genuinely loving the actual theme/design of your weblog. Do you ever run into any kind of internet browser compatibility issues? Several my website visitors have were not impressed with my web page not necessarily working effectively in Internet explorer yet looks great in Opera. Have you got any suggestions for help fix this problem?
Wow! I�ve been looking for such a long time for a websites like yours. I am so delighted I found it. I will surely bookmark it and check it often.
Strange this kind of post is totaly unrelated to what I was searching google for, but it was indexed at the first page. I’m assuming you’re doing something right if Google likes you enough to place you on page one of a non relevant research.
As soon as accessed your site for the first time, I thought it was just another blog. Boy, was I wrong. It�s an outstanding site indeed. I�m so pleased I came across it, I�ll surely return soon.
When seen your site for the first time, I believed it was yet another blog. After reading through a number of articles I completely changed my mind. It�s a brilliant website indeed.
Wow! That�s what I�m speaking about: a great, insightful, eye-catching short article. Great job!
We are a small grouping of voluneers working hard on a mission that will require know-how in this field. The facts about your web blog provided us a great deal of suggestions which will help our mission. I just want to thank you for your great labor and perseverance.
I�ve never experienced this much joy reading a write-up than right now analyzing your article. It simply opened up my eyes and gave me hope. Thank you so much for sharing this.
Hello there! After looking at this post I can tell you one thing: I most certainly will definitely recommend you to my pals. They will just gasps the information above.
Wonderful work! I bet you had a revelation when wrote the report. I�ve never seen a much more inspired write-up. It was easily readable and grasp. Appreciate your sharing expressing.
Great! I have to say that, I am impressed with your website. I thought it was super easy to browse through. The information you write about is exceptional. I certainly will come back to you in search for creativity and ideas.
This piece you shared above is of great value. Thank you for your great work. Please keep us informed like this.
As being a web-site owner I do think the information (blank) here’s terrific , My wife and i thank you for work.You ought to keep writing eternally! Best of luck
It�s been my pleasure to get a call from an old friend who contacted me after examining your piece of writing. He assumed I’d be curious about studying more as it�s been quite some time since I�ve been researching this trouble. It would be wonderful to share with you several of my own work on a similar topic as well as have a debate. If you are curious, just buzz me. Apart from that, simply keep on writing, you are doing great!
I really agree with almost all your thoughts expressed in the article above. However, there is something I cannot agree with. On the other hand, most of individuals will find your content rather educative and exciting. So carry on doing what you are already doing. Best of luck!
I am very happy to read through this piece of content. It�s fantastic information and facts, very well organized, simple to comprehend, very easy to be grasped by any dummy. I�d highly recommend this post to everyone who�s searching for good quality info. We appreciate you sharing this document with us.
How you present things make them appear very easy. Even so, I find it quite challenging to comprehend for the majority of us as this matter is rather broad and complex. Thus, We are getting excited about up coming post. I like the actual way you communicate what�s on your mind.
Many thanks for sharing this super details. Your site is so cool. I liked reading through every posting. I love the way you understand each matter. I bookmarked your site and definately will definitely come back for extra articles or blog posts in the near future. You, guys, rock!
This is a wow article. I just adore the way you address this matter. You simply gained a new visitor. Looking forward to reading your new posts.
Hello. I discovered your blog while searching online for a associated subject. Your blog came up and I ought to confess I am impressed with the subjects of your articles or blog posts and just how you sustain your opinion. I’ll unquestionably revisit it soon.
I need to share this website with my loved ones. It is absolutely truly worth viewing.
Such a great find. This website is really worth visiting.
I feel significantly more men when looking over this write-up. I recommend this specific awesome article to all the females as well.
Hi! I can�t thank you sufficiently. I was working on a paper for college and was absolutely out of ideas. So I made a decision to take some time studying some posts. Now I’ve got countless ideas because of your blog, I don�t even know where to start. Thanks again!
They say we all gain knowledge of new staff every day our entire life. After looking over this article I can surely claim: I�m stuffed for today! lol
Thanks a ton for offering every person such a wonderful possibility to get recommendations from here. It�s always very beneficial to use your site. me and my (blank) colleagues have a lot of fun visiting your blog really 3 times in a single week to find out the most recent items you have got. Obviously, I�m usually impressed with all the remarkable tactics you serve.
I have to say that I don�t like submitting reviews on different blogs. However, your document is really informative, I simply have to thank you for expressing it with all of us.
The internet is filled with trash. I’m sick and tired of sites where the post is posted just to fill in an empty space. I am therefore relieved I recently found your site. I was satisfied with the content of the articles. I will return to you now if you guarantee to keep on doing whatever you are doing. Cheers!
Being a parent I am so glad to have found this particular site. I recommended it to my teenage boy. He is crazy about your site content. You challenge him with just about every write-up. He discovered several problems, with the inclusion of how it’s like to have a wonderful giving mentality to let folks totally fully understand a number of advanced topic areas. Because of this site he lessened the time spent playing various pc games. Therefore, I must thank you for this. Hope you continue on doing whatever you already are.
I love your way of writing. I simply don�t see a satisfactory amount of posts. Please don�t be laid back, post some new articles, if not, you�ll loose a fan.
I ran across your blog by accident. Now I can�t avoid checking it every day, waiting for a new premium quality content material. Thank you for your blog and for your time and readiness to share with us your experience and thoughts.
Once I lose interest at the office I begin browsing for all variety of blogs. After studying many content articles, I close up the internet browser being far more bored since the articles stand for merely a couple of words put together. However, I need to confess that I have been navigating your website and i’m satisfied with your posts. Finally I stumbled upon someone who knows how to write a rare article about a normal event. Great job!
You’ve made some great points here. It got me thinking. Hope I am able to sleep tonight. lol
I like the points you�ve made. I have got to do a little analysis on this topic as it really interests me personally. I think I’ll ask for my colleagues� opinion tomorrow at the staff meeting. Thanks for a great post!
One of the most complete as well as very well thought out write up I have discovered on this issue online. It is rather thoughtful of you to share this kind of information. Thanks a lot!
Whenever I submitted my initial comment on your site I enabled the �Notify me when a new commend is added�. Now I receive nearly 5 email notifications for the same comment. Can you please remove my email from your data base?
Great stuff, man. I have comprehended your past articles. I believe you are a great article author. I certainly like what you�re saying and the way you say it. You’re making this pleasant while you still look after keeping it sensible. I can�t wait for your next post. By the way, your website looks just great!
Great blog. Plenty of sites like your own cover subjects that simply aren�t included in magazines. I don�t know how we’ve got on 12 years ago with just magazines and newspapers.
In case you�ve been recently following a website together with social media around the world the final a few years, you realize there�s one heated question that keeps appearing: and thats the specific question about statements on blogging sites. Must weblogs have responses? Should these types of opinions be moderated?
This is the perfect website for individuals who need to know more details on this issue. You express your points so nicely. It is difficult to dispute with you,not that I might want to�HaHa. Congrats! Awesome work!
A real terrific article. You absolutely placed a brand new spin on a topic that�s been written about for years. Great job!
Been so occupied these days with my nerve-racking job. After I finally completed the report I needed in order to send to my supervisor, felt so relieved. Decided to navigate the internet for a few minutes before reaching the cooking area. Reading your site content I did not even realize how fast the time flew by. I even forgot about my hunger. Would be nice to staff my stomach with your articles and never go to the grocery store. Ha ha. That is so tiresome. Well, just thanks for your great articles. Will definitely come back to your blog soon.
Had a 5 min break from my tense occupation. Wanted to check my e-mail, but finished up browsing some blogs. Found yours by chance. The 5 min were way gone. Ha ha. My boss got upset with me now for not sending him some paperwork by the due date. Will definitely come back to your site when have any free time. Keep on writing, you;ve just gained a new reader. Cheers!
My son is so busy with the homework and extracurricular activities, he asked me to print out some very nice staff for one of his reports about this subject. He got so excited when read your document as it opened up his horizon. He wrote that paper very quickly then got an A. So we appreciate you your wonderful post. He asked me to bookmark you. He shall revisit whenever lacking creativity. Cheers!
I usually hold my opinion to myself and don�t leave any blog comments. Couldn�t help myself looking at your post though. Fantastic content. Thanks!
Thanks for the time invested into the following article. I like reading regarding other people�s point of view on this matter. You fascinated me personally. Wonderful!
My brother suggested I may like this website. He was once totally right. This put up truly made my day. You cann’t imagine just how much time I had spent for this information! Thanks!