Politics vs climate change

Oct 11, 2012 Full story: The Kaleidoscope 27

As the presidential election rolls around once again, the debate is of course centered on the most important issue - the economy.

Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#1 Oct 11, 2012
Politics deals with human error. Science deals with natural facts. They cannot compete. They are not competitors. Politics can either embrace or deny science but never compete with it. i.e.'versus' is buloney.

Those who think it does, obviously are playing politics, not dealing with reality.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#2 Oct 11, 2012
Huh?
Fun Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#3 Oct 12, 2012
Politics. We elect, or hire, people to do the job of running our country. Everyone has an idea of the most important issues that the newly elected must deal with. Right now global warming isn't on the top of many lists.

The economy takes top spot these days. And the recent attacks in the middle east and moving US troops to the syrian border has the attention of those who pay attention.

Politics follows what's important to the various constituencies. Big bird, not at th top of the list. Global warming, well its more important than big bird but it doesn't trump the deaths of four people. The lies about about what hapened are troubliing.

Anyone who read the international press om 9-12 knew it was a planned terrorist attack. Our president was misleading the public because he didn't want to admit to the facts.

Most who are aware are more concerned about the failures/misrepresentations than global warming. And thats not good for global warming. Remember global warming has demonstrated its own lack of integrity. Its one thing to be skeptical, the next step down is cynical.

This president with his poor judgement on many issues, has made more skeptics and is increasing the number cynics daily.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#4 Oct 12, 2012
Fun Facts wrote:
Remember global warming has demonstrated its own lack of integrity.
?

The thermometers are lying?

Perhaps you meant to say that climate scientists have demonstrated a lack of integrity?

Of course that would simply show your lack of integrity since the climate scientists have been cleared by half a dozen independent reports.

It's the lying deniers like you who have demonstrated your lack of integrity with the continuing baseless smears and lies repeated long after they were shown to be false.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#5 Oct 12, 2012
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
?
The thermometers are lying?
Perhaps you meant to say that climate scientists have demonstrated a lack of integrity?
Of course that would simply show your lack of integrity since the climate scientists have been cleared by half a dozen independent reports.
It's the lying deniers like you who have demonstrated your lack of integrity with the continuing baseless smears and lies repeated long after they were shown to be false.
Perhaps he means that 70% of Arctic sea ice hasn't actually melted, but has been hidden somewhere by scientific leftists.
Fun Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#6 Oct 12, 2012
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
?
The thermometers are lying?
Perhaps you meant to say that climate scientists have demonstrated a lack of integrity?
Of course that would simply show your lack of integrity since the climate scientists have been cleared by half a dozen independent reports.
It's the lying deniers like you who have demonstrated your lack of integrity with the continuing baseless smears and lies repeated long after they were shown to be false.
No, thermometers don't lie, they have no agenda. Yes climategate demonstrated a lack of integrity. As did published IPCC reports based on magazine articles.

Altho, not in the same category, the number of failed predictions has added to a lack of credibility.

Climate science was hijacked by politics. Science is a long steady process. If politics had not gotten involved, I think we would have seen a robust debate but not the dire pronouncements made on incomplete infomation.

Only political activist would have stated the west freeway in NYC would be underwater in 2000. Or tell us it wasn't going to snow in Britain. No islands have been lost to rising seas. If politics were not involved, the news articles about the arctic 'melt' would include the storm that broke up the ice. Same thing happened in 2007. The stories about the greenland ice melt would have included the info that this happens on a cyclical basis and the last time was the1880s.

When pollitics gets involved, science, the scientific method and full disclosure are lost.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#7 Oct 12, 2012
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps he means that 70% of Arctic sea ice hasn't actually melted, but has been hidden somewhere by scientific leftists.
Or perhaps all of these?

Rapid warming in the modern instrumental period.
Recent record high temperatures exceeding record lows.
Growing seasons lengthening.
Warmer nights.
Ocean heat content increasing.
More wildfires.
Earlier snow melts.
Earlier and longer fire season.
Snow fields melting earlier.
Loss of snow cover.
Loss of permafrost.
Melting glaciers.
Retreating glaciers.
Arctic sea ice extent and volume in decline.
Loss of ice from Greenland.
Loss of ice from the Antarctic.
Rising sea levels.
Increasing ocean acidity.
Movement of plant species.
Migration of bird species.
Timing of breeding.
Appearance of flowers in spring.
Butterfly emergence.
Movement of agricultural zones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

All examples of global warming's complete lack of integrity.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#8 Oct 12, 2012
Fun Facts wrote:
Yes climategate demonstrated a lack of integrity.
Every single interdependent enquiry said it didn't.

Which makes you simply a liar.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#9 Oct 12, 2012
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Climate science was hijacked by politics.
Yes, climate science was hijacked by politics; it was hijacked by your politics.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#10 Oct 12, 2012
Don't worry Northie...... 'fun farts' doesn't have horsepower to drive anything he hijacks out of the AGW garage.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#11 Oct 12, 2012
Hey, Northie.... Read my new discussion,'Large Scale Vortex(?) develops in front of advancing Arctic Ice Pack'. You're going to like it!
Fun Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#12 Oct 12, 2012
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, climate science was hijacked by politics; it was hijacked by your politics.
I think it was hijacked by the UN. Used as a funding mechanism.
Fun Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#13 Oct 12, 2012
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Or perhaps all of these?
Rapid warming in the modern instrumental period.
Recent record high temperatures exceeding record lows.
Growing seasons lengthening.
Warmer nights.
Ocean heat content increasing.
More wildfires.
Earlier snow melts.
Earlier and longer fire season.
Snow fields melting earlier.
Loss of snow cover.
Loss of permafrost.
Melting glaciers.
Retreating glaciers.
Arctic sea ice extent and volume in decline.
Loss of ice from Greenland.
Loss of ice from the Antarctic.
Rising sea levels.
Increasing ocean acidity.
Movement of plant species.
Migration of bird species.
Timing of breeding.
Appearance of flowers in spring.
Butterfly emergence.
Movement of agricultural zones.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
All examples of global warming's complete lack of integrity.
I was speaking of the climategate emails and how that illustrated a lack of integrity on behalf of the climate scientists. But I also question the published data and all of the adjustments that are constantly done to the historical data base.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#14 Oct 13, 2012
fun farts wrote:
I was speaking of.....
I was speaking of 'steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling', who is a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#15 Oct 13, 2012
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
I was speaking of the climategate emails and how that illustrated a lack of integrity on behalf of the climate scientists.
Half a dozen independent enquiries said there was no lack of integrity, which means you're a liar.
But I also question the published data and all of the adjustments that are constantly done to the historical data base.
The fact you don't understand why adjustments are necessary to get accurate data means you don't understand the science involved.

You're not alone. Anthony Watts doesn't either.
Fun Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#17 Oct 13, 2012
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Half a dozen independent enquiries said there was no lack of integrity, which means you're a liar.
<quoted text>
The fact you don't understand why adjustments are necessary to get accurate data means you don't understand the science involved.
You're not alone. Anthony Watts doesn't either.
Here we have a saying 'an attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client' just who was independent in the inquiries you cite?

Your independent inquiries were as creditiible as Obama's statements that the libyan attack was because of a movie. Anyone who read the emails from the climategate scientists or the international press on sept 12, 2012 knew the truth.

Reading, not only recommended if you want to understand the science, but is very helpful if you want to discover the facts of politics.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#18 Oct 13, 2012
Fun Facts wrote:
Anyone who read the emails from the climategate scientists or the international press on sept 12, 2012 knew the truth.
Except the half dozen independent enquiries which read them and said there was nothing in them.

Stop lying.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#19 Oct 13, 2012
If ff aka fossil fuel were to stop lying, it would have nothing to post.

ff aka fossil fuel even posted that it advised the NM legislature on global climate change. LOL. NM is the home for thousands of scientists. Why would they listen to a liar like ff aka fossil fuel? Would they not check resumes and qualifications?

This is similar to tina who says it has been offered to teach at a university. kal was also similar.

How can we forget gordy!

LOL.
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

#21 Oct 14, 2012
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Except the half dozen independent enquiries which read them and said there was nothing in them.
Stop lying.
Who was 'independent' in the enquiries you cite? The British government? The very government most likely to be held accountable for the misinformation from the Met Office? Is that the 'independent' you are refering to?

Like asking the fox to do an independent audit of the chicken coop.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#22 Oct 14, 2012
Firstly, the Met Office has not issued a report on this issue...

How about that, ff? Lying is not cute:

An article by David Rose appears today in the Mail on Sunday under the title:‘Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released… and here is the chart to prove it’

It is the second article Mr Rose has written which contains some misleading information, after he wrote an article earlier this year on the same theme – you see our response to that one here.

http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 3 min No Surprize 154,084
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min TSM 1,110,768
Michele Bachmann: Obama Won Because He's Black ... (Feb '14) 1 hr Edthirty 336
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr loose cannon 178,203
Who is the worst president since WWII ? 1 hr Aprilvue 510
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 2 hr Earthling-1 32,679
Democrats Urge First Lady to Hit the Trail 2 hr Nasty Road Show 4
•••

2012 Presidential Election People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••