Heating up

Heating up

There are 4 comments on the The Sofia Echo story from Feb 17, 2012, titled Heating up. In it, The Sofia Echo reports that:

Hardly a week goes by that we aren't reporting a story on concerns about global warming.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Sofia Echo.

NobodyYouKnow

Toronto, Canada

#1 Feb 18, 2012
"Recently, 16 respected scientists signed a letter, published in the Wall Street Journal, which indicated there is no need to panic about global warming, arguing there’s no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonise' the world’s economy"

Is a red herring (what 'drastic action'? What panic? and why would there be 'no need'??)

The vast majority of the 'signatories' of this fraud have NO climate science background. Science can inform policy, but policy cannot inform science. And these are examples of policy trying to distort the science.

"But, by sharing what Drs Happer and Schmidt shared with us on this issue, we wanted to give you just a little "food for thought""

Translation. We wanted to be a mouthpiece for these politically motivated lobbyists (neither is active in climate research), in order to 'generate confusion' in the gullible public reading this trash. It almost seems that they are boasting of it!
liberal foot stomper

Beckley, WV

#2 Feb 18, 2012
NobodyYouKnow wrote:
"Recently, 16 respected scientists signed a letter, published in the Wall Street Journal, which indicated there is no need to panic about global warming, arguing thereÂ’s no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonise' the worldÂ’s economy"

Is a red herring (what 'drastic action'? What panic? and why would there be 'no need'??)

The vast majority of the 'signatories' of this fraud have NO climate science background. Science can inform policy, but policy cannot inform science. And these are examples of policy trying to distort the science.

"But, by sharing what Drs Happer and Schmidt shared with us on this issue, we wanted to give you just a little "food for thought""

Translation. We wanted to be a mouthpiece for these politically motivated lobbyists (neither is active in climate research), in order to 'generate confusion' in the gullible public reading this trash. It almost seems that they are boasting of it!
keep believing what you want and you can think you're right.liberals control and influence the media just like a government run socialist party should..
NobodyYouKnow

Toronto, Canada

#3 Feb 18, 2012
liberal foot stomper wrote:
<quoted text>
keep believing what you want and you can think you're right.liberals control and influence the media just like a government run socialist party should..
Good to know that even the shoddiest reports has SOMEONE gullible enough to follow their lead.

But calling it 'belief' when it is science fact, and calling it 'liberal mind control' or 'socialism' just points to the fact that you are someone who doesn't read or understand science.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#5 Feb 19, 2012
liberal foot stomper wrote:
keep believing what you want and you can think you're right.liberals control and influence the media just like a government run socialist party should..
Nobody's comments are best ignored, he's not even sure who he is frm day to day.
Only in Toronto are peole taught that CO2 is a "thermal pollutant," Nobody said it is and LessFact agreed.
LessFactMoreHype, alias:
NobodyYouEverWantToKnow wrote:
That CO2 cannot be a 'pollutant'? Wrong. Anything CAN and IS a pollutant in a specific context. In this case, as a greenhouse gas causing 'thermal pollution' of the planet.
-
The point is really that the whole claim of 'CO2 is vital to life' and 'CO2 is plant food' promoted by Earthling is not so much that it is technically wrong, but that it is IRRELEVANT to the issue of CO2 as a 'thermal pollutant'. Agreed?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
-
Earthling-1 wrote:
Is CO2 really a thermal pollutant, "a greenhouse gas causing 'thermal pollution' of the planet?"
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
Yes. Obviously. Try reading the science. Nature or Science is available in your local library (I assume) for free. Beyond that you can check out the serious science web portals.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
Try reading either the science journals or even these threads. They are all about 'thermal pollution' of the planet by GHGs. If you cannot understand that yet, see a doctor about your growing senility.
<quoted text>
Both the noun and adjective are well defined. Try reading a dictionary.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
-
NB: Both of these entities believe "epistemologists" compile dicionaries.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Physics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Gravitational Mass and Inertial Mass (Jun '14) Jun '17 Newton 14
About Time Dilation (Oct '10) Jun '17 Newton 41
Is Inertial Force not a Real Force ? (Jan '17) Jun '17 Newton 12
Theory of Plasmatic Fundamentals May '17 Julius the Jules 1
Is time travel possible? (Oct '10) May '17 Engima1956 20
EM drive uses the equation E/c^2 = mass? May '17 TRquestion 1
Newton's gravitational equation May '17 mich 1
More from around the web