"Death Penalty for 'climate deniers' ..." eco fundamentalists run riot

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by Nanninga, Dec 28, 2012.

  1. Nanninga

    Nanninga Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18

    The political left all over the industrialized world becomes a growing cancer. More and more I get the feeling they get the upper hand.
     
  2. Taxcutter

    Taxcutter New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    20,847
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Typical of the Left.

    They gotta a whole lot of Chinese to execute.
     
  3. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ..the facts, sir, just the facts

    [video=youtube;BWdiHtv6T6s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=BWdiHtv6T6s[/video]
     
  4. Taxcutter

    Taxcutter New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    20,847
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Very similar rhetoric coming from gun thieves.
     
  5. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You mean those who oppose a centralised government consolidating direct control over everything in the name of "protecting the environment" ?
     
  6. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,871
    Likes Received:
    73,626
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    So one nutcase suggests something in a lecture and everyone freaks

    Meanwhile Marc Morano of "Climate Depot" has been publishing Climate Scientists private emails and encouraging others to "tell them what they really think" resulting in harassment and abuse of the climate scientists - and not one word of condemnation has come his way
     
  7. Nanninga

    Nanninga Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Pardon me, but if the left would consider him as a nutcase, he would have lost his permission to teach at the university, wouldn't he?

    I did not even hear of that case.
     
  8. MannieD

    MannieD New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    5,127
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Please note that I am not directly suggesting that the threat of execution be carried out. I am simply presenting a logical argument. I am neither a politician nor a lawyer. I am just thinking aloud about an important problem."

    From the link
     
  9. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,871
    Likes Received:
    73,626
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Google it up - Morano has been pulling that stunt for a while now and some of the poor scientists targeted by him have been the victims of some rather nasty threats

    http://theconversation.edu.au/climate-scientists-the-target-in-culture-war-1692

    So which one is worse - what one guy said in a talk somewhere or what Morano has been doing and getting away with?
     
  10. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Marc Morano should get a medal for exposing lies and corruption, while others worship the quicksand some others[climatologists] walk on
     
  11. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,100
    Likes Received:
    6,786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I still would like to see some evidence that man is not causing the current warming. Something I can sink my teeth into other than propoganda. And that is all the OP is....propoganda.

    I am waiting for some real evidence....if you are convinced that man is not causing the current warming show me!
     
  12. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    As the human caused warming continues to increase as human CO2 emissions keep rising and adding to total atmospheric levels, the world's climate patterns will inevitably continue to change at an accelerating rate, causing agricultural disruptions and failures that will put hundreds of millions or billions of people into starvation over the rest of this century. At some point the world very well might take a hard look at the current attempts by the fossil fuel industry and their stooges to deny and denigrate the sound science that warns the world of the reality and dangers of AGW/CC. The fossil fuel industry has made, and continues to make, considerable efforts to prevent or delay the necessary actions the world must take to deal with this climate change crisis, because those actions would hurt the profits they're making from selling the fossil carbon fuels that are causing the problem in the first place. When the death toll and damages start to really mount, the world may say that these actions, motivated by an insane and selfish greed, amount to "Crimes Against Humanity", just as the world made that same decision about the Nazi Holocaust, when the facts came out. If that happens, personally I would rather hope that these conniving oil corp execs and 'vested interest' billionaires, and their paid media stooges and bought politicians, get the same treatment that was meted out to the Nazis at Nuremberg.


    Climate Crimes Against Humanity?
    Forbes

    Gregory Unruh
    10/29/2012
    (excerpts)
    Increasing amounts of evidence show that scientific projections made since the 1980s are coming true. Nine of the hottest years on record have occurred since 2000 and 2012 is on track to be the hottest in history. Arctic summer ice is disappearing faster than iPad minis and the Tundra is giving up its climate-warming methane at an alarming rate. Research now shows the beginning of a change that could take the climate system away from any hope of human control. Frozen methane hydrates along the U.S. continental shelf are destabilizing due to shifts in the Gulf Stream. Scientists’ physical predictions are often accompanied by societal and economic predictions as well. Frankenstorms like Sandy are part of the forecasts, but more extreme scenarios foresee drought, famine, population dislocations, climate refugees and human suffering. Should these predictions come true, you might expect anger and demand for an accounting.

    This could take the form of lawsuits against industries associated with greenhouse gases, like oil and gas. ExxonMobil, arguably the inventor of the denialists’ strategy of doubt, got out of the denial business in 2005, fearing the climate equivalent of tobacco litigation. With a company full of geologists, it would be impossible to argue that the company didn’t understand the science. But worse case human suffering might lead to something more. Will future generations see the action of today’s denialists as
    “climate crimes against humanity?” If so, they will have abundant documentation to press charges. With the internet becoming a vast searchable archive, no one’s past actions can be refuted. As former Republican Representative Bob Inglis said in his final address to congress, “I’m very excited to be here Mr. Chairman, because this is on the record. And it’s a wonderful thing about Congressional hearings, they’re on the record… and our grandchildren, or great-grandchildren, are going to read.”
     
  13. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do you not stand on your feet?
    Earthquakes are a result of the planet crust shifting.
    There is plenty of volcanic activity around the globe.
    Scientists take core samples of the earth and ice.
    These samples show the history of the planets' condition over X number of years.
    They have all concluded that there was a major event 1,500 years ago. It was referred to as the mini-Ice Age. Not enough Man-made waste to trigger such an event. Probably volcanic in nature
    They've traced major events back as far as 10,000,000 years ago.
    3,500 years ago, there was an event which that had glaciers as far down as what is known today Alabama. Again, it predates Man and his pollution
    Approximately 1000 years ago, give or take a decade or two, the Mayan civilization was subject to one of the most servere droughts and tumbled that civilization.
    Meteor strikes and solar flares are two things that can affect our climate here on this marble, from without.
    Most assuredly, we've contributed to the situation, but enough to change natural history? That remains to be seen, I think.
    Take your pick, you'll probably be spot on
     
  14. Taxcutter

    Taxcutter New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    20,847
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Are you going to press charges against over two billion Chinese and Indians? They totally thumb their noses at the Global Warming rubbish.
     
  15. Windigo

    Windigo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    15,026
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [​IMG]

    How humane of you.
     
  16. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,871
    Likes Received:
    73,626
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Just be grateful that they do not press charges against the USA for years of being the world leader in pollution and putting us into this fix in the first place
     
  17. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,871
    Likes Received:
    73,626
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    What is worse - someone speculating about what should happen to those who have been stopping the actions to ameliorate the problem or Marc Morano posting email addresses of scientists and "encouraging" others to express their opinions leading to scientists and their families getting direct death and other threats
     
  18. Nanninga

    Nanninga Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    When it's about the extermination of people clearly what the guy said in a talk somewhere, what a silly question.
     
  19. Nanninga

    Nanninga Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Hallo, dear "politicalcenter"!

    1. What a funny move exemplaric of those clima change hysterians. Instead of bringing some evidences for their thesis, they withdraw to the point that nobody can disprove their thesis. That's the same argument creative design people make use of.

    2. This topic is not about whether or not and/or up to which degree the clima change is made by humans. This topic is about the terrorism of leftists who want to put to death people who stand for the other point of view.

    In fact in the scientific world clima change in all its facettes is highly controverted, thats the reason why people like you would like to put people to death who do research in that topic and who are not on the pay check list of the IPCC. Furthermore you can see here in Germany who causes poverty, its the Green party who pampers a few solar billionaries, producing non competitive solar panels and making energy more and more to a luxus product for rich people only.

    To your joy of your victor's justice in Nuremberg, it took at least over 40 million people we put in the ground before you were able to put your Soviet idea of justice through, I am very positive this eco Stalinists like you will not walk the walk.
     
  20. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,100
    Likes Received:
    6,786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are new here and have no idea the amount of evidence that has been brought to these various debates by many "warmers" much smarter than I am.

    I just don't see any evidence from the other side. all I see are vain attempts to discredit the evidence that is brought forward. No evidence to support the "natural cycles" that deniers claim. When a lot of us started this debate deniers would not even admit the earth was warming. Now, after several disasters of the climate nature they HAVE to admit the earth is in fact getting warmer simply because thermometers do not lie.

    I have read so much denier BS that it is coming out of my ears!!!!!

    Greenland ice is melting....Arctic sea ice is melting more every year....sea levels are rising....Antarctic land ice is melting....deserts are growing.....Summers are hotter and winters are warmer every year (except winters warmed by ocean currents)....Every scientific society on earth that is legitimate says the earth is warming and man is the cause....this includes NASA...NOAA...and even....here it comes...RFDTV and the Weather Channel.

    I am not going to take the word of some "whoever you are" on the internet over some of the most brillant minds in the world....

    Sorry....Ain't buying it!!!! Some idiot comes up with an assine idea and it represents the thinking of everyone doesn't it ???

    You guys are getting desperate....but not to worry.... we are in so deep now it would take a moblization bigger than the mobilization during WW2.

    We will all bake and starve together!!!...
     
  21. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,100
    Likes Received:
    6,786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If you need some go to Nasa, Noaa, The Brittish Antarctic Survey, the Pew Institute, The University of Alabama Huntsville, Penn State, Berkley and many others.

    The truth sometimes hurts...grow up....quit the childish name calling and deal with it!!!
     
  22. Windigo

    Windigo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    15,026
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do.

    [​IMG]

    Truth hurts.
     
  23. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Well....actually.....no, you don't "deal with it" at all. You just keep your head in the sand and deny reality.




    "Truth hurts"....is that why you avoid it so fiercely?

    Perhaps what hurts the truth is cherry-picking an exceptionally warm year to start your graph and then using a short period of only about 16 years. Trend lines look a lot different in the real world.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  24. Windigo

    Windigo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    15,026
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually we chose 16 years because 5 years ago when the climate plateau was becoming apparent Dr. Phil Jones said

    So 16 years is hardly a cherry pick. Your own scientists set the number!

    Real world??? Your graph is a childish MS paint point to point. First of all tend lines aren't calculated by a point to point line. So your whole argument about start and end points is only works on very stupid people. Trend lines are based on the average of the range. So the start point and end points don't have near the effect you think. And what little effect they do have you have ass backwards. A high start point can raise the trend of a graph because it raises the average of the range. If I start my graph during the 2001 La Nina it actually makes my graph trend negative because removing the 98-99 ENSO lowers the average of the range.

    Trend with the 98-99 ENSO
    [​IMG]

    Trend Without the 99-99 ENSO
    [​IMG]

    But despite the slight change in sign you can see that the effect of the starting point is minimal. Both graphs are essentially 0 trend.


    And that explains how the earth's warming has stalled in the face of exponentially rising CO2 how???
     
  25. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There is a reason denier cultists always try to pick somewhere around 1998 to begin one of their deceptive graphs and that is because 1998 was an exceptionally warm year with the strongest El Nino condition ever recorded. 1998 world average temperatures rose way above previous years to make it the warmest year on record by quite a margin, pushed by a combination of natural variations and global warming. Comparing many of the following years to 1998 was a trick the deniers used to claim 'look here, it's getting cooler', but although a year like 2002 was cooler than 1998, it was nevertheless warmer than every other year before 2002 back to the beginning of organized temperature records in the mid 1800's, so any longer term graph will show a definite rising temperature trend. Of course, 2005 turned out to be warmer than 1998 and 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year. 2013 will almost certainly be the next warmest year on record. The denier cultists now have a dogma/myth that says the there has been no warming in the last 15 years or so and that global warming has stopped. Their dogma on this is scientifically absurd but then so are most of their nonsensical beliefs and myths. Every one of the last 12 years (2001-2012) has been one of the 13 warmest years on record. This last decade was the warmest decade on record. So Windigo did, in fact, deliberately cherry-pick the starting point for his graph to distort the trend. When I dinged him over using too short a time period to show trends over the background noise, he claimed that Dr. Jones of the CRU "set the number" but that is not what Dr, Jones was referring to. When Dr. Jones talks about: "the simulations rule out zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more", he does not mean the current trends over the last 10 or 15 years. Those are not flat or "zero". There is a statistically significant positive warming trend in the recent temperature set. Nor does Dr. Jones think that 15 years is an adequate length of time to show real trends. Here's what Dr. Jones actually has to say about that point.

    Global warming since 1995 'now significant'
    BBC News

    By Richard Black - Environment correspondent,
    10 June 2011
    (excerpts)
    Climate warming since 1995 is now statistically significant, according to Phil Jones, the UK scientist targeted in the "ClimateGate" affair. Last year, he told BBC News that post-1995 warming was not statistically significant - a statement still seen on blogs critical of the idea of man-made climate change. But another year of data has pushed the trend past the threshold usually used to assess whether trends are "real". Dr Jones says this shows the importance of using longer records for analysis. By widespread convention, scientists use a minimum threshold of 95% to assess whether a trend is likely to be down to an underlying cause, rather than emerging by chance. If a trend meets the 95% threshold, it basically means that the odds of it being down to chance are less than one in 20. Last year's analysis, which went to 2009, did not reach this threshold; but adding data for 2010 takes it over the line.

    "The trend over the period 1995-2009 was significant at the 90% level, but wasn't significant at the standard 95% level that people use", Professor Jones told BBC News."Basically what's changed is one more year [of data]. That period 1995-2009 was just 15 years - and because of the uncertainty in estimating trends over short periods, an extra year has made that trend significant at the 95% level which is the traditional threshold that statisticians have used for many years. It just shows the difficulty of achieving significance with a short time series, and that's why longer series - 20 or 30 years - would be a much better way of estimating trends and getting significance on a consistent basis" Professor Jones' previous comment, from a BBC interview in Febuary 2010, is routinely quoted - erroneously - as demonstration that the Earth's surface temperature is not rising.










    Yeah, "real world", something you don't seem to be very familiar with. Trend lines are figured by calculating the mean path that averages all of the other data points from the start point to the end point. You can indeed have smaller shorter term trend lines within a larger graph. The graph I cited that you are ignorantly trying to criticize features four calculated trend lines that cover the last 150 years, the last 100 years, the last 50 years and the last 25 years. These show clearly that the world average temperatures have been rising at an accelerating rate over the last 150 years.





    Total nonsense. You have no idea what you're talking about.

    LOLOLOLOL.....that's pretty fraudulent....the trend line in your first graph, that supposedly starts during the period around the extreme 1998 record high temperatures, has a start value of about 0.41 somethings (presumably degrees) and the trend line in your other graph, that supposedly starts during the low temperature period of the 2001 La Nina, has a start value of 0.49. Cooking the books again, eh Windy?




    1. - The Earth's warming has not "stalled", just temporarily slowed a bit. The rising temperature trend is still present and statistically significant.
    2. - CO2 is still rising at dangerous rates but it is not "exponentially" rising. You obviously have no idea what the word means.
    3. - Over the short term, natural variations, like long solar minimums and extended La Nina conditions, can act to slow the overall warming trend and, over the last several decades, the huge Chinese industrial expansion and increase in coal fired power plants has increased reflective particulates in the atmosphere, dimming the sunlight. As we pass through the solar maximum and ENSO neutral conditions this next year, expect to see a new high temperature record for the world, surpassing 2010, and expect to see even higher record temperatures as the decade progresses.
     

Share This Page