Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[MDK.SIE]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5086 Edited January 12, 2010 by MDK.SIE

[Stormy]

You might be interested in these criticisms of carbon trading, and their suggestions for how climate emissions would be better dealt with:

 

http://www.carbontradewatch.org/

 

But Carbon Trading is what we are stuck with, and Carbon Trading is what cost 1700 jobs in Redcar. That is the real price which people are paying for this terrible folly and it is only going to get worse unless people say that they have had enough. Why are we stuck with it? Because it makes some people very, VERY rich. Lets not forget Dr Pachauri's (IPCC) business interests! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6890839/The-questions-Dr-Pachauri-still-has-to-answer.html

 

Thankfully some good work is being done by some excellent journalists, scientists and some UKIP MEPs to expose the frauds who are making a fortune out of this crime, the likes of Al Gore and Dr Pachauri for starters.

 

 

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/busy-man.html

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiVXHcF2RNM

 

 

 

If you are sick of being lied to then tell your prospective MPs that you will not vote for them if they condone what has happened in Redcar in the name of Global Warming.

That won't leave many choices im afraid.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Stormy

[Stormy]

Rather than go through all the arguments again, here is a list of the top 83 climate change denial myths many of which have cropped up on this thread:

 

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

 

I have just looked through that list and most of the responses are mere anecdotes. The sites authours may have well just said

 

"No it isn't"

 

"You're wrong"

 

And they forgot reason number 84, the crucial reason which trumps all others:

 

"There are a few very powerful people who are becoming very very rich as a direct result of the policies which governments are implementing in the name of AGW/Climate Change."

 

I challenge any of you warmists to disprove the above

[Wildcat]

I have just looked through that list and most of the responses are mere anecdotes. The sites authours may have well just said

 

"No it isn't"

 

"You're wrong"

 

And they forgot reason number 84, the crucial reason which trumps all others:

 

"There are a few very powerful people who are becoming very very rich as a direct result of the policies which governments are implementing in the name of AGW/Climate Change."

 

I challenge any of you warmists to disprove the above

 

The "anecdotes" are written is laymans terms yet still reference scientific journals and papers where required. I find it hard to believe that you can honestly have come to that opinion about the evidence here, is no more than nay saying.

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

 

Your point is however irrelevant.

 

There are always profiteers and people out to make a buck on the back of any development, or any research, observing that doesn't say anything about the evidence on which it is based unless the people profiting are the same people that are reporting the science of climate change. The countless scientists who are experts in their field of study whether that be on climate itselft or the people reporting changed migration patterns that support and are explained by climate change do not finanacially benefit from publishing their research that supports human climate change. That is something that contrasts markedly with the denialists who clearly do in many cases receive significant backing and funding from the fossil fuel industry to make their claims.

 

See here:

http://www.desmogblog.com/slamming-the-climate-skeptic-scam

 

And browse the resources on the website to find the money fossil fuel companies spend on anti-global warming PR, using just the same tactics as Tobacco companies used to protect their profits and keep the scientific evidence from the public.

http://www.desmogblog.com/

Edited January 13, 2010 by Wildcat

[Wildcat]

But Carbon Trading is what we are stuck with, and Carbon Trading is what cost 1700 jobs in Redcar. That is the real price which people are paying for this terrible folly and it is only going to get worse unless people say that they have had enough. Why are we stuck with it? Because it makes some people very, VERY rich. Lets not forget Dr Pachauri's (IPCC) business interests! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6890839/The-questions-Dr-Pachauri-still-has-to-answer.html

 

 

Dr Pachauri was put in post by a sceptical Bush administration against the will of the Scientists.

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=5734881&postcount=679

 

If he is part of any conspiracy it is a denialist one.

[Wildcat]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5086

 

Do you really believe any of that rubbish?

 

The Global Warming Swindle has been deconstructed so many times, it is commonly seen as an open goal by denialists the lies on it are so obvious, and the scandals of outraged researchers publically denouncing the programme because their views were distorted and taken out of context.

 

Take a look at some of these responses:

http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle

Edited January 13, 2010 by Wildcat

[Wildcat]

Re: No Evidence for Global Warming.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1242398/Now-tests-ice-ISNT-melting-Sea-water-shelf-East-Antarctic-freezing.html

 

No evidence of there not being global warming either, the models and predictions used relating to climate change don't predict significant warming of the antarctic whilst the ozone whole is being repleted.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/01/polar-amplification/

 

There is however evidence of warming in the antarctic troposphere:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/03/significant-warming-of-the-antarctic-winter-troposphere/

[Grandad.Malky]

Nodens, MDK.SIE , nice try but you are wasting your time, those that have already been brainwashed will just belittle you.

[Wildcat]

Nodens, MDK.SIE , nice try but you are wasting your time, those that have already been brainwashed will just belittle you.

 

You have a thing about Mind Control, are you sure your AFDB is properly adjusted?

[MDK.SIE]

Nodens, MDK.SIE , nice try but you are wasting your time, those that have already been brainwashed will just belittle you.

 

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5086

 

I am not out to change minds or say what is right or wrong . the above site is how I feel about the situation and no amount of gov white wash will change my mind.

 

there is always the one,s with gov isued painted on eyes and then there is us who see the world so clearly and refuse to become sheep/clones/drones ..

 

Claude Allegre, a leading French scientist, who was among the first scientists to try to warn people of the dangers of global warming 20 years ago, now believes that “increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena”. Allegre said, “There is no basis for saying, as most do, that the "science is settled." He is convinced that global warming is a natural change and sees the threat of the ‘great dangers’ that it supposedly poses as being bloated and highly exaggerated. Also recently, the President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus said, when discussing the recent ruling by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that global warming is man-made, “Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment.” And if you are about to ask why no politicians here seem to be saying this, Klaus offered up an answer, “Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice”. Nigel Calder, the former editor of New Scientist, wrote an article in the UK Sunday Times, in which he stated, “When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works.” He further stated that, “Twenty years ago, climate research became politicised in favour of one particular hypothesis”. And in reference to how the media is representing those who dissent from the man-made theory he stated, “they often imagine that anyone who doubts the hypothesis of man-made global warming must be in the pay of the oil companies”, which is exactly what I believed up until I did my research. He also wrote, “Enthusiasm for the global-warming scare also ensures that heatwaves make headlines, while contrary symptoms, such as this winter’s billion-dollar loss of Californian crops to unusual frost, are relegated to the business pages”.