Seems to me, the cure is worse than the disease. So thanks, but no thanks.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Yes, the last decade saw global cooling, not warming
- Thread starter bugscoe
- Start date
Seems to me, the cure is worse than the disease. So thanks, but no thanks.
Quote from Ricter:
The MMGW hoax hoax (you heard it here, folks) is a retention of wealth scam. Big, dirty oil, gas, and other industries are spreading FUD as fast and as far as they can.
What's the difference between our dirty, present industry that is creating jobs and making profits, and a future greener industry that is creating jobs and making profits?
Well the problem is declaring carbon dioxide a dangerous gas that needs to be regulated and thus will usher in green jobs is it's just another example of the broken window fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
Quote from bugscoe:
This is an excellent point. However, it's the solution to the so called problem that is the huge problem. It's nothing but a big transfer of wealth scam.
And when the solution is the goal far in advance of the problem, it's very easy to get scientists to toe your idealogical line when it's your funding stream that feeds their family.
No, it's really not.
Quote from Index piker:
Well the problem is declaring carbon dioxide a dangerous gas that needs to be regulated and thus will usher in green jobs is it's just another example of the broken window fallacy.
Nope. Try something else. The broken window fallacy regards breaking something, not in ignoring something that's already broken.
Quote from bigdavediode:
Alright, please give an example of how scientists' opinions were changed en masse, around the world, to preserve their funding.
For bonus points, please include NASA in your example.
You claim to be a cheerleader for science, yet you refuse to look at any science that challenges your bias. That is the definition of a junkster politcal hack.
For some reason you're hung up on NASA, an agency who for the last two years has refused to provide information to show how it shaped its climate data and to also explain why they've had to repeatedly correct their data going back to the 1930's.
Just like how the Anglia boys 'lost' the very data their entire lives work was built upon when questions began to surface. That way no one can even question them- the data is gone for good. Now that is science baby! NASA is taking the same approach. Don't question us, just trust us.
Now if I try to sell you a trading system, but refuse to show you my actual account trading records in using that system, you tell me what my intentions are? I guess for you, the numbers I put on the cheaply designed website are scientific enough for you to open your pocket book. And if you don't like me refusing, I'll simply tell you I lost them.
People like you, who have no working bullshit meter are a dream come true for liberalism, and trading system sellers, and used cars salesmen, and the Nigerians looking to give you that $2 million bucks left just for you.
My trading system is really good...you'll be rich...
James Hansen, head of NASAâs Goddard Institute for Space Studies, whose records were also cited as evidence, second only to the CRU data, of incontrovertible man-made global warming. McIntyre also caught Hansen engaging in the same sort of statistical manipulation in which past temperatures were lowered and recent ones âadjustedâ to convey the false impression that the nonexistent warming trend was accelerating. After trying to block McIntyreâs IP address, NASA was forced to back down from its claim that 1998 was the hottest year in U.S. history.