Climate Change and the dissenters — 23 Comments

  1. Money. If there is no global warming then funding for studies will disappear. Only by making predictions of disaster  can they create sufficient panic to get access to nearly unlimited funds.  Government leaders go along as it lets them collect additional money to be used to further their own agendas and to force the rest of us to adopt their ideologies, or the ideologies they proclaim while living in gated luxury homes and flying around world in private aircraft while being attended by a legion of staffers catering to their every whim.

  2. Jim C – But there are millions who believe in AGW [just look at the Copenhagen protests].  Surely there must be one or two amongst them with enough braincells to work out that there is something radically wrong?

  3. The debate is over. Your 100 letter is signed by nutters, oil corporate (et al) bought and paid for scientists, and at least one scientist who died before he supposedly signed it. Jim C is correct that it’s about money. Corporate profit. American corporations are scouring the planet to find and pay for any scientist (doesn’t have to be a climatologist, a paleo- physicist will do) who will try and cast doubt on the reality of man made climate change. Carbon emissions. 
    I am starting to wonder if these corps are bribing bloggers too.

  4. TT –

    The debate is over”  Why?  Surely if there is any doubt it should be investigated?

    nutters, oil corporate (et al) bought and paid for scientists”  Why is it that any dissenter is immediately labeled as a nutter or is in the pockets of the corporates?  The only argument that AGWs propose is that dissenters are being paid.  That is a pathetic argument and the last resort of the desperate.

    I am starting to wonder if these corps are bribing bloggers too”  I fucking wish!!

  5. Im getting more and more worried listening to this insane Copenhagen circle jerk between all the unwashed rabble rosers and socialist dictators getting standing ovations and now a promised 100 billion hand out (which of course isnt enough they want 350b!) its like im watching every western country lining up to commit suicide how can western country give out billions and hamstring themselfs while in a recession with 10-15% unemployment being pretty common? it beggars belief …But i try to remind myself that this insanity is just that undemocratic insanity and i hope so very hard all our populations can see global warming/these gatherings for what they are now and will vote locally accordingly when they get the chance i don’t think its to late to turn back from the precipice but Christ its genuinely worrying now.
    I also think we badly need to disband the UN its just a playground for retarded policy the governments cant get through in their own country’s it’s utterly undemocratic …..and you can say the same about the EU

  6. It’s like 911. You get 2000 structural engineers together from all over the planet to explain and prove to the educated scientific community at  large how the towers came down. Sure you will be able to scrape together 100 fringe engineers to disagree for one reason or another. Doesn’t mean that it remains an open question. Oh and see who you are in bed with. Kinda proves my point.

  7. TT – There are so many holes in that argument I don’t know where to start.  But I’ll try.

    Structural engineering is based on known laws of physics and engineering.  Any situation can be modeled and reproduced with great accuracy.  The same can not be said for climate science.  It is an unknown field that is based on ‘rough guess’ computer modeling.  The predictions that were made pre 1995 are already proving false.

    The current AGW theory originated with a mere 60 scientists and there is a far greater number now questioning this.  I think they should be heard.

  8. TT -Do you do anything but state “the debate is over” or utter something about big oil ? i dont think you had any come back for any article about any subject brought up but those two statments your a credit to alarmist sheep every where i think you like those two statements because your geniunely incapable of debateing anyone on this subject and just hope they will go away..abit like al gore your a lot like a chat bot churing out one or two lines over and over.
 <– russians  “claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.” this stuff is comeing out every single day now pritty much and yet you still plug your ears and churn out the same two lines while our beloved leaders sign away billions on a more than likely make believe issue

  9. What exactly is your agenda D ?  How many years did you study climatology? What is your PhD in?  Thousands (not a hundred) that have put the time and learning in all over the world, working independantly, have reached the self same conclusion. I mean, how the fuck have you earned the right to be listened to on a subject you  know fuck all about. Yes , I know fuck all about it too. That’s why we have scientists/experts. Duh!! You think they are all part of some commie conspiracy. Idiotic.  And you GD. Are you seiously making the argument that until every single fuckwit in the world agrees that climate change is real and is not a natural sequence then the scientific community should continue the debate and governments should fail to act?  The debate is over. You cannot go on debating dumbasses for ever any more than I am going to. Offended? Eat my shorts.
    Doctor says to a guy “I have bad news and worse news.” Guy says “what’s the bad news?”  Doc says “you have 24 hours to live.”  Guy says “well what’s the worse news?” Doc says “I forgot to tell you yesterday.” Apropos ?

  10. TT – I don’t know about D but my agenda is to determine the truth, preferably before our ‘leaders’ commit us to a potentially disastrous course of action.

    Why are you dismissing serious concerns as fuckwits?  Surely it would be in your interests to prove that these people are wrong, rather than just coming up with spurious claims that they are ‘being paid’?

    The point I am making is that whether you believe in AGW or not, why is there such a closed mindset that blankly refuses to countenance any idea that there may be errors?  What is everyone afraid of?  Surely a discovery that AGW is false would be cause for international celebration?

  11. You want to determine the truth. You can not.  We don’t have the skills. Experts can. That’s why we have them. Why is this so hard to grasp? Apart from a small  minority fringe element, which will ALWAYS be there even when the seas are boiling. The overwhelming scientific concensus is clear and is settled. I told you google Richard Lindz for one example. He is one of your 100. On the payroll. The conspiracy is within the corporations and the deniars, not the scientific community as a whole. You are the one with the closed mindset. You will never change your mind no matter what the evidence is. Some folks are always against everything to do with government or “experts. ” It’s a form of arrogance. Governments are all stupid cunts, scientists are all crazy, experts don’t know what they are talking about etc, etc.

  12. Oh , and Glenn Miller was abducted by aliens, Roosveldt allowed Pearl Harbor to happen, Marilyn was murdered by JFK, JFK was killed by, -well take your pick, Cheney orchestrated 9-11, and Elvis is working in the Burger King down the street. I quit.

  13. Except for thanking you for the topic,again, D for making my blood boil and Brighid for her thoughtfull contribution.

  14. TT – I agree I am not a climatologist, however I do know enough about science to know that some of the concerns raised are not only valid but would fundamentally change the whole prognosis.

    You accuse me of having a closed mind yet you are the one who refuses to even acknowledge that there may be errors.  You persist in your ‘oil company conspiracy’ theory even though you have no proof whatsoever.  Maybe you can pull a name or two out of the hat, but I refuse to believe that all of the concerns I have come across are ‘oil funded’.

    I don’t want to be rude, but frankly your outburst about the other ‘conspiracies’ is not helping any debate.  I just don’t understand why your mind is so closed that you cannot even entertain the idea that anything could be wrong.

  15. TT is obviously under the thrall of the great cabal that is making massive amounts of money off scare-mongering the rest of us back into caves. Why has everyone so quickly forgotten the leaked ( or stolen, I don’t care which)  e-mails that at the very least raised the possibility that the “experts” were manipulating  information to create the exact scenario that justified their extremely profitable moral high ground? Does anyone remember the hole in the ozone layer that was going to send cancer rates through the roof ( sorry, I know there’s a bad joke in there somewhere) and what happened? Cancer rates  increased dramatically, particularily in countries that traditionally had had low rates, like Japan, but guess what also happened at the same time? That’s right, low cancer countries, like Japan( and the rest of the far east but I’m using one country to stand for all)  experienced a siesmic shift in their diet from seafood and rice ( oversimplified I know) to Big Macs, All dressed Pizzas and God forgive us all, Hotdogs! Sometimes the evidence under your nose is easy to over look because it smell so damn GOOD.

  16. Frankly, I can’t believe what I’ve been reading in this thread of comments. As a southern boy Elvis would be working in KFC not Burger King.

  17. You’re going to love this:
    This quote resonated particularly with me: “A couple of days after my blog on cars was published, I was shocked to find an e-mail from an environmentalist who said it should never have been posted. He made no effort whatsoever to refute my claims, his argument was simply that it undermined the debate to publish such heresy.”
    Combating pollution of the environment is one thing but this stupid endless talk about carbon this, carbon that! Give me strength! There is somewhere in the region of 6.5 billion people on the planet. Using the word billions make it seem small so in numbers that is 6,500,000,000 people breathing in oxygen and exhaling the dreaded ‘C’ word. Lots of talk about culling cows but little about culling people!
    To put 6.5 billion people into perspective that’s the equivilent of 81,250 matches in Croke Park given a full capacity of  80,000. Or a full house each day for 222 years!

    And of course the global population is growing.

  18. Climate change sceptics are demanding smoking gun data from what is a modelling problem. The earth and all its sea and air currents is a complex system. One the one hand scientists all over the world plus those who live in areas already affected by climate change are reporting data which does suggest we have a serious problem emerging. But this isn’t good enough for sceptics who demand ‘proof’. Scientists can only point to data and come to a conclusion from that data. Sceptics say that the planet has ‘warmed’ over the past ten years but there is definitely some sponsored trickery going on there because they count from the last El Nino event- basically paid sceptics are indeed salami slicing data and holding it up as some kind of denial bible.

    Climate change sceptics are changing tack from outright denial to saying things like ‘its a naturally occurring event so fuhgeddaboudit’. Climate change sceptics don’t address the problem of methane escape in the arctic which is likely to be a killer on its own. I think Grandad even said a couple of weeks back that 350ppm carbon in the atmosphere is tiny- the problem is that we’ve gone from historically having low carbon atmosphere (under 100ppm most of our existence) to 350ppm in a short time and 450ppm is where there is a tipping point for non-recovery.

    I’m not an alarmist. I suspect that we will have a technological solution in a few years probably involving use of the oceans but there again we’ve got problems. We are poisoning the lowest level foodstuff in the oceans and that affects the entire planetary food chain.

    Fish stocks are being drastically depleted and if we do have extremes of weather due to our interference with the biosphere then we are going to see disaster on a huge scale within the next generation.

    I see more evidence for paid climate change denial than I do for a massive and unwieldy conspiracy among scientists to create alarm and therefore attract funding. I suspect that Naomi Klein’s ‘shock doctrine’ has been twisted by the likes of the US fossil fuel industry, oil majors and car manufacturers to provide a ‘conspiracy theory’ behind which those who can’t be fucked having any change to their lifestyle to do absolutely nothing.

    There was a very good piece in the Sunday Times last week- a supplement written by Brian Appleyard who declared himself a sceptic and was then asked to do a feature having researched the subject as best he could. He changed his mind when he reviewed the evidence and is now certain that we have a serious problem on our hands. I recommend the article as it carefully looks at the denier claims.


  19.  No BS Mon Capitan. I wish I could express myself so well. I was starting to feel like El Lobo Solo on crack.

  20. TT – I have taken time off from my hectic schedule and have read the article in depth.  One of my big problems with it is that he is dismissing arguments with his ‘fact’, where his ‘fact’ is promptly challenged in the comments.  One of the big thorns in the side of the AGW crowd is the Medieval Warming Period.  It throws all their calculations haywire, so their answer is to dismiss/ignore it.  Appleyard dismisses it as a ‘local phenomenon’ which it wasn’t.  I’m sorry, but this isn’t my Damascus moment.

Hosted by Curratech Blog Hosting