Skull Valley lawmaker wants both sides of climate change taught to students

Feb 5, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Verde Independent

Saying students are getting only one side of the debate, a state senator wants to free teachers to tell students why they believe there is no such thing human-caused "global warming.' The proposal by Sen.

Comments (Page 36)

Showing posts 701 - 720 of1,624
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#722
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Don’t talk utter bollocks? Mitigation is not the heart of the issue, the issue is that climate change exists it is proven to exist and it is agreed by scientific consensus to be aggravated and amplified by mans intervention.
Is the issue Climate Change exists? You are an Alarmist. Who is saying the climate doesn't change and go through cycles? Now what do you say to the Scientists that say it's not caused by man? Yes the Scientists that are not on a Government payroll. Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes. And the Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#723
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Is the issue Climate Change exists? You are an Alarmist. Who is saying the climate doesn't change and go through cycles? Now what do you say to the Scientists that say it's not caused by man? Yes the Scientists that are not on a Government payroll. Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes. And the Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences.
There's really only a tiny handful of scientists like that. Their arguments are discredited and go against the evidence. And they tend to be free market fundamentalists or "God's in his heaven, so global warming can't be a problem" creationists.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#724
Apr 5, 2013
 
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Show me a link about that consensus? And make sure it's not a Government funded or al Gore funded study.
I will not pander to your paranoia about a government conspiracy that our government is falsly manipulating data to promote global warming.

That's your issue to deal with.

There are very few (if any) PRIVATE climatologists.

What we **DO** have is summed up by the "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opini...

"The scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is more than 90% certain that humans are causing most of it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.[1][2][3][4] This scientific consensus is expressed in synthesis reports, by scientific bodies of national or international standing, and by surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their peer-reviewed publications, and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys.

National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 which states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[5]
The main conclusions of the IPCC Working Group I on global warming were the following:

1.The global average surface temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and 0.17 °C per decade in the last 30 years.[6]

2."There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities", in particular emissions of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane.[7]

3.If greenhouse gas emissions continue the warming will also continue, with temperatures projected to increase by 1.4 °C to 5.8 °C between 1990 and 2100. Accompanying this temperature increase will be increases in some types of extreme weather and a projected sea level rise.[8] From IPCC Working Group II: On balance the impacts of global warming will be significantly negative, especially for larger values of warming.[9]

No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these three main points; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.[10][11] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions."

<<Truncated for brevity. More at link above>>

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#725
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
I will not pander to your paranoia about a government conspiracy that our government is falsly manipulating data to promote global warming.
That's your issue to deal with.
There are very few (if any) PRIVATE climatologists.

<<Truncated for brevity. More at link above>>
Nice, Wikipedia. Here are more from your source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientis... It's not a conspiracy that the government revolves around money. http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2... NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Why are all the models by the alarmists manipulated to make it look worse then it is?
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-h...
Why is NASA making up things that are not true? Who funds NASA?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/nasa...
MIT scientists baffled by global warming theory, contradicts scientific data http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/30/mit-sci...
But you stick to wikipedia....LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#726
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
There's really only a tiny handful of scientists like that. Their arguments are discredited and go against the evidence. And they tend to be free market fundamentalists or "God's in his heaven, so global warming can't be a problem" creationists.
It has nothing to do with religion, I know you bigots like something to blame it on. Warmest Temperatures In 4,000 Years? Not So Fast, Global Warming Alarmists http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/... The scientific record shows quite clearly that current temperatures are significantly cooler than the 4,000-year average, yet the media uses a seriously flawed study to claim the opposite. Global warming alarmists put their trust in the media, while global warming realists put their trust in the science.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#727
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

While many scientists are willing to go on record to point out trends in global warming, more than 17,000 scientists have signed a petition circulated by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine saying that they see no evidence of global warming at all. Less formal surveys amongst climatologists have pointed in the same direction.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#728
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Scientists abandon global warming ‘lie’
650 to dissent at U.N. climate change conference

“I am a skeptic …. Global warming has become a new religion.”— Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

*“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly …. As a scientist I remain skeptical.”— Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

* Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history …. When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”— U.N. IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.

*“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds …. I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.”— Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.

*“The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC “are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.”— Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.

I guess Gore hasn't got to them yet, maybe he is enjoying flying around the world to one of his mansions laughing at you Alarmist nuts....LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#729
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp … . Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” — Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#730
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.”— U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

*“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.”— Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#731
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiccardoFire wrote:
While many scientists are willing to go on record to point out trends in global warming, more than 17,000 scientists have signed a petition circulated by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine saying that they see no evidence of global warming at all. Less formal surveys amongst climatologists have pointed in the same direction.
Scientists?

You could have got a maths degree 30 years ago and worked as an estate agent selling house since then and still sign the petition.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#732
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiccardoFire wrote:
Scientists abandon global warming ‘lie’
650 to dissent at U.N. climate change conference
“I am a skeptic …. Global warming has become a new religion.”— Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
*“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly …. As a scientist I remain skeptical.”— Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
* Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history …. When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”— U.N. IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.
*“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds …. I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.”— Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.
*“The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC “are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.”— Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
I guess Gore hasn't got to them yet, maybe he is enjoying flying around the world to one of his mansions laughing at you Alarmist nuts....LOL
Gullible, aren't you?

There were never 650 scientists at the conference.

It's just a list of scientists who have said something James Inhofe views as sceptical of AGW (even if they say they believe in the risks of AGW and ask to be removed from the list).

A bit of Soviet style propaganda- you swallowed it.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/12/17/mo...
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#733
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiccardoFire wrote:
“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp …. Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.”— Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.
He's a journalist, not a scientist, although he does have a science degree.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#734
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiccardoFire wrote:
“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.”— U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
*“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.”— Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.
The first is a scientist, although he's also a religious nut: a "God's in his heaven, so global warming can't be a problem" creationist as I said before.

The second is a retired chemical engineer- expertise on climate science, none.

Getting desperate, aren't you?

Fake petitions, phoney lists and a handful of cranks and religious nut.

You deniers are so gullible.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#735
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
He's a journalist, not a scientist, although he does have a science degree.
Your hero, the great Gore: His grades during his first two years put him in the lower one-fifth of the class. During his sophomore year, he reportedly spent much of his time watching television, shooting pool, and occasionally smoking marijuana.

Gore doesn't know shit about science, his background is politics, he's used to lying. Gore has no scientific background. That's why he never debates anyone about Global warming. He could be exposed and lose money. Why do you lie so much?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#736
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
The first is a scientist, although he's also a religious nut: a "God's in his heaven, so global warming can't be a problem" creationist as I said before.
The second is a retired chemical engineer- expertise on climate science, none.
Getting desperate, aren't you?
Fake petitions, phoney lists and a handful of cranks and religious nut.
You deniers are so gullible.
What does your hate of religion have to do with global warming? Do you think if there is global warming it makes a difference to a religion? Why are so many alarmists atheists? Seems like Global warming with the Rev Gore has become your missing piece.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#737
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas, exhaled at high concentrations by each of us, and a key component of the biosphere's life cycle. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are today. Better plant varieties, chemical fertilizers and agricultural management contributed to the great increase in agricultural yields of the past century, but part of the increase almost certainly came from additional CO2 in the atmosphere.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#738
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Why is there so much passion about global warming, and why has the issue become so vexing that the American Physical Society, from which Dr. Giaever resigned a few months ago, refused the seemingly reasonable request by many of its members to remove the word "incontrovertible" from its description of a scientific issue? There are several reasons, but a good place to start is the old question "cui bono?" Or the modern update, "Follow the money."

Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet. Lysenko and his team lived very well, and they fiercely defended their dogma and the privileges it brought them.

Speaking for many scientists and engineers who have looked carefully and independently at the science of climate, we have a message to any candidate for public office: There is no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to "decarbonize" the world's economy. Even if one accepts the inflated climate forecasts of the IPCC, aggressive greenhouse-gas control policies are not justified economically.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#739
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Ricardo is missing a piece: a brain.

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/sha...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#740
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

An antidote to ricardo-poison?

Here is a summary of global warming and climate change myths, sorted by recent popularity vs what science says, all 174 of them.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#741
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>To ricardo:

Gullible, aren't you?
There were never 650 scientists at the conference.
It's just a list of scientists who have said something James Inhofe views as sceptical of AGW (even if they say they believe in the risks of AGW and ask to be removed from the list).
A bit of Soviet style propaganda- you swallowed it.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/12/17/mo...
Right on.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 701 - 720 of1,624
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••