To all you AGW alarmists out there, read this.

And then come back and tell us why the carbon tax isn't a scam, the biggest scam of all time to fleece rich nations of their wealth and ration energy to their citizens.

And in Australia's case austerity measures ingognito.

 

We shouldn`t be too surprised by this news D&D.

 

Doesn't surpise me that the UN is a member of this climate temperature non sense considering they stand to gain $3billion (10%) from Australians carbon tax per year based on a $30billion revenue raiser.

Why is Gillard giving the UN revenue money raised from the carbon tax?

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_MpLocFQus"]WORLD GOVERNMENT - Bob Brown wants a "Global Parliament " The National Press Club. 29/June/2011 NWO - YouTube[/ame]

Well Bob Brown wants the new world order government so i guess Gillard also wants it, our contribution to helping build up the concept.

While we're on the subject of treason might want to ask yourself why Gillard is giving the International Mometary Fund (IMF) $6.8 billion dollars, thats $6.8 billion that has to come out of our budget.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/gillard-...104-1n04y.html

Maybe this is were its coming from, i dont really know but its suss how its the exact same figure?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...n-to-keep-surplus-as-europe-hurts-growth.html

 

How many papers on Evolution also talk about magic and things like that.

Point invalid.

 

Fair enough tank, i guess you'll know about it when it hits you square between the eyes.

Not magic dude but reality and a very valid point indeed.

Why give billions to foriegn corporations run by big business moguels when it comes to farming carbon credits and swaping carbon credit derivatives on the stock exchange!

Is this really the most efficient way to clean up man made pollution.

Just look at what swapping derivatives are doing to countries like Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Spain and the UK and the US are also in the same boat.

This is the system chosen by our government to clean up pollution, HHAAA

We'll see exactly where it leads us.

I can tell you know not through magic or crystal balls but by common sense that every man and woman who knows something about how the world works and decipher for themselves its not rocket science.

AGW is the biggest scam in human history and Gillard will be remebered as the worst PM ever for blindly leading the nation into it.

 

This section is the IPCC's conclusions related to policymakers. Can somebody explain why it is so surprising that they omitted information that was contrary to their conclusions drawn from the vast body of scientific literature? Isn't that sorta the point? To advise them on what they believe the scientific evidence points to?

Also, your link seems a bit dated. The IPCC have brought out their fourth assessment report.

 

Well bugs, could you please explain why an assessment report should selectively omit facts? I wouldn`t trust an academic to post a letter, let alone assess facts, and CERTAINLY not compile and massage the assessment to aid a pre formed agenda.

 

For the same reason that astronomical reports on say, Jupiter, don't mention what Jupiter will do for your love life.

 

BEcause it is the IPCC's assessment that this is what is happening so they relate the relevant facts? Seems pretty (*)(*)(*)(*) obvious to me.

Enjoy, ptif.

 

Australians deserve what they get!! If the troll queen and the poo-scooper tried this non sense carbon tax in any other country, they would have been chased our of the country with sticks and stones. If the people and the media don't start protecting Australia from the likes of Gillard and Brown, then there will simply be NO Australia left to protect.

We have Do-gooders running around screaming that the carbon tax is the best thing since sliced bread, but they have forgotten to tell me why their prophet Juliar didn't comitt 100% of the carbon tax revenue raised to green project, and why she committed 10% nearly $3billion yearly of the revenue raised from the carbon tax to the UN?

So how much more Australian tax payers money is Gillard and her bastard Government is going to ship off shore to other countries in place of Australia?

How many $10's of Billions of Australian tax payers dollars is Gillard giving away every year? Is Australia really that financially & socially wealthy that we can afford this kind of generosity every year?

 

Relevant facts? Don`t you mean "convenient facts"?

 

The report is explicitly titled "summary for policymakers". It is a summary of their conclusions based on their reports and is specifically designed to help policymakers. Hence it follows that they are the facts relevant to their conclusions. Read it for yourself.

The OP article says: The UN IPCC WG1 Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Third Assessment Report is not an assessment of climate change science, even though it claims to be.

It's not supposed to be an 'assessment of climate change science' (and I couldn't find it claiming to be in the fourth assessment). It's a summary of their reports to help policymakers. You aid them by saying what you believe the evidence points to, not giving them both sides of the story (no matter how uneven the evidence stacks up) and saying 'you guys figure it out'. That would defeat the purpose.

 

What a nonsense.
Scare mongering right wing crap, without the Greens we are moving 200 years back. Do you feel at home, in 1812?

 

Great! So their policies aren`t based on complete reality then. Who`d a thunk it?

 

Two hundred years ago, it was black cats and witchcraft, now it`s AGW. The greens have gone backwards.

 

Dude you have comprehension problems. Read my post again. The report is based on what they believe is happening/most likely to happen. How hard is that to understand? It makes PERFECT sense if you think about it for one minute.

Repeating for your benefit: It's not supposed to be an 'assessment of climate change science' (and I couldn't find it claiming to be in the fourth assessment). It's a summary of their reports to help policymakers. You aid them by saying what you believe the evidence points to, not giving them both sides of the story (no matter how uneven the evidence stacks up) and saying 'you guys figure it out'. That would defeat the purpose.

 

It only makes sense to omit relevant info if one is either a con artist, or a trained zombie.

 

Or if you can't comprehend what was just said...btw, the info is not relevant in the summary for policymakers.

 

Just keep being led around like a lamb.

 

I assume this is a tacit admission that you were wrong. Common sense prevails

And ironically all I have done is use basic critical thinking to show why Wojick missed the mark entirely.

 

How do you keep coming up with this stuff?

 

Easy. I have a decent intellect and am amused when people are caught out but go to any length/say anything to deny this fact. It would be easier for you if you had the integrity to admit when you are wrong instead of making inane one-liners like the rest of your ilk. I don't mind rubbing your face in it though. Whatever it takes

And the critical thinking part is just something that is true. You should try it.

 

PC ostriches bury their heads in trivial irrelevance instead of sand. La La Land must be bursting at the seems with hoards of naive, suburban, PC battery hens.

 

The only person burying their head in the sand is you by not applying any critical thinking to the document in the OP even after you've been shown why Wojick had it completely wrong. It seems whenever you lose an argument you resort to these inane, ad hom posts that are completely devoid of substance. It's very boring.