Ice Age on the Way!

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

the BBC flat refuses to even talk to anyone that is not a card carrying MMGW cultist.

...

They had it right 20 years ago then Al Gore made his fantasy movie .
BBC News | Sci/Tech | Scientists blame sun for global warming

You're downright embarrassing at times.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You're downright embarrassing at times.

nothing but the facts .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You're downright embarrassing at times.

https://inews.co.uk/news/bbc-says-ma...t-get-airtime/

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4oHhlM5udHM

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

https://inews.co.uk/news/bbc-says-ma...t-get-airtime/

I don't think climate change deniers should get airtime either. Like anti-vaxxers, anti-evolutionists, flat-earthers... there simply isn't the evidence around to put those fringe viewpoints on anywhere near an equal footing.


I'm pretty sure the BBC still posts skeptical climate science when it's significant enough.

[nelly]

So what if climate change is as bad as the consensus tells us? Where do I find the deniers when we're starving, facing mass immigration, and so on?

I'm sure they will give me a little extra of their share of their food for being wrong. Right?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by odonnellryan

So what if climate change is as bad as the consensus tells us? Where do I find the deniers when we're starving, facing mass immigration, and so on?

I'm sure they will give me a little extra of their share of their food for being wrong. Right?

you can find me on my boat enjoying a sunset and whatever fish I caught that day for dinner.
Btw I'm not a denier .
The climate is a dynamic thing it is always changing I just feel that it is 99% natural .
Man has done little if anything to change that.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I don't think climate change deniers should get airtime either. Like anti-vaxxers, anti-evolutionists, flat-earthers... there simply isn't the evidence around to put those fringe viewpoints on anywhere near an equal footing.


I'm pretty sure the BBC still posts skeptical climate science when it's significant enough.

that's your issue the closed mindedness of the MMGWC .

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

The climate is a dynamic thing it is always changing I just feel that it is 99% natural .
Man has done little if anything to change that.

That IS, essentially, climate-change denial. Sorry.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

That IS, essentially, climate-change denial. Sorry.

that is the problem then.
Because I don't bow at the alter of AGW .
Just reinforces my statements of the MMGWC being a religion .

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I don't think climate change deniers should get airtime either. Like anti-vaxxers, anti-evolutionists, flat-earthers... there simply isn't the evidence around to put those fringe viewpoints on anywhere near an equal footing.


I'm pretty sure the BBC still posts skeptical climate science when it's significant enough.

Not so long ago maybe 30 years ago, the BIG concensus amoungst the medical community was that peptic ulcers were caused by excessive stomach acid, and the only cure was to lessen the amount of the acid or surgery to remove the ulcer. Nearly 100% of medical science believed this except for one lone Australian “denier” who believed ulcers were caused by a bacteria. People laughed at him for believing that bacteria could actually live in such a caustic environment as the human stomach.

Well guess what? He was right, so now thirty years later peptic ulcers are treated with antibiotics to kill the bacteria, saving millions of unnecessary, painful surgeries. Did it ever occure to you, that you might end up on the wrong side of history regarding your steadfast, unwavering belief in global warming? What if the medical community had failed to give “airtime” to the Australian medical “fringe” researcher?

I prefer to consider my self an open minded individual who looks at all sides of the issues and then make up my own mind by way of historical data and the world around ME. The seas have not risen so much as an inch anywhere around me over the past 60 years, I really don’t care what other people call me, think of me... whatever. Climate does change, but for right now... I’d prefer to be in a warming trend, but there’s nothing I can do about it.

Meanwhile... it’s gunna snow tonight.

BTW.... didn’t Isaac Newton have some pretty “fringe” ideas in his time? Or how about Galileo winding up before the inqusition for his “fringe viewpoint?”

[Kenomac]

Actually, it was two medical research “deniers” working together who discovered the cause and cure for peptic ulcers and were rewarded with a Nobel Prize for their “fringe idea.”

Discovery of H. pylori and its role in gastric and peptic ulcer disease

[OzePete]

Saw this opinion regards Global Warming and its derivatives!.....

QUOTE:
Like many scams, this issue is based on a modicum of truth, then massaged and manipulated into something designed to frighten the crap out of the populace, empower politicians and of course make a lot of money for its promoters, governments, ‘the science’ and those on side.

The real question is not if climate change is occurring or if mankind is causing global warming because climate change is real and has been happening for billions of years and of course we are warming the planet. You can't create so much heat etc., without causing some temperature rise. (Go piddle in the ocean and the ocean will be warmer, but not much!)

The questions are:
( A ) By how much has mankind contributed to climate change or warming?.... No one seems to have any indisputable answer. Interestingly the carbon dioxide levels (now about 400ppm) have been much higher in the past, pre SUV days!!

( B ) What are the pros and cons of any temperature change.... Most science agree that warmer is far less harmful than cooling.

( C ) Can we do anything about it.... Very little.

( D ) And if so what is the cost.... Huge and guess who the big beneficiaries are, starting with Al.

( E ) Is it all worth trying to change the climate and creating all this fear about it. Definitely not, unless you're a 'Climate scientist on the receiving end' I mean, pop into the barbers shop and ask him if you need a haircut.. odds are he will say YES!

( F ) Who will suffer the most with efforts to reduce carbon dioxide? Again it will be the poor specially in developing countries.

Some things to consider:
You can cherry pick articles and links to justify any way you need to go on this subject but at the end of the day best to forget that and use some common sense and logic: (Rare as it is these days!)

Remember that the science was solid behind the following:

* The ‘discovery’ of a massive hole in the Ozone layer. Great cost to humanity trying to overcome that until it is proven that the holes are normal, always were there and naturally expand and contract seasonally. (Whoops, no money here let’s look for something else)

* In 1976 the scare was the start of global cooling! ( A few years later...Damn it, the joints getting warmer again, better drop that one...

* The millennium bug. Remember this little pearler. Planes will drop out of the sky, hospitals will shut down, riots in the streets, yada yada yada... What happed.. 4/5ths of bugger all except that an estimated $600 BILLION was scammed with this one.
And who got those dollars? Not me or you Gunga Din! (How many 100’s of hospitals, millions kids vaccinated / fed, etc with the billions these thieving scamming bastards got away with?)

* About the same time the grand daddy of them all was hatched, AGW. Global warming. This was going to be easy cos the temperature had been on a slight increase over the past few decades (ironically similar to rises earlier in the century but don't mention those!) A lot of predictions were made (most since proven wrong in time), governments throwing billions at 'the science' and carbon schemes.

Yes they were going to save the planet, just keep the money flowing and we will tell you what you want to hear. But bugger me that damned temperature increase stopped so an adjustment is needed, a new theme.. climate change is born. (Or should we say born-again cos after all this whole crap has become a religion!)

The point of all this?
Yes there is slight global warming but nothing like the promoters claim, (with virtually none of the science’s predicted rise over the past 20 years) and the climate has been changing since before our time so get over it.

And why won't any of the big shot promoters like Al Gore debate Lord Monckton? Because they know he will make them and their theories look stupid and they don’t want to bugger up their bottom line.

Wake up folks, this is one giant beat up. While based on a modicum of truth, it is powered along by the need for more power and much more money! A very clever scam!

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Actually, it was two medical research “deniers” working together who discovered the cause and cure for peptic ulcers and were rewarded with a Nobel Prize for their “fringe idea.”

Discovery of H. pylori and its role in gastric and peptic ulcer disease

Lovely story. Important story.

Notes:

• What happened re H pylori is the exception, not the rule. Science works pretty good.
• The truth about the cause of peptic ulcers was finally proven scientifically, not by a pack of lobbyists and their political partners slagging scientists, and trying to do an end-run around the normal scientific process.
• If the same focus and resources that goes into climate research was poured into ulcers, I'm certain that h. pylori would have been discovered alot sooner.
• I don't think I've ever called any bona fide researcher or scientist a "denier". Mostly because even the most critical CC critics who know what they're talking about don't go around telling us how wonderful CO2 is, or that the human contribution is insignificant. I reserve that word for the willfully ignorant.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by OzePete

Saw this opinion regards Global Warming and its derivatives!.....

QUOTE:
Like many scams, this issue is based on a modicum of truth, then massaged and manipulated into something designed to frighten the crap out of the populace, empower politicians and of course make a lot of money for its promoters, governments, ‘the science’ and those on side.

The real question is not if climate change is occurring or if mankind is causing global warming because climate change is real and has been happening for billions of years and of course we are warming the planet. You can't create so much heat etc., without causing some temperature rise. (Go piddle in the ocean and the ocean will be warmer, but not much!)

The questions are:
( A ) By how much has mankind contributed to climate change or warming?.... No one seems to have any indisputable answer. Interestingly the carbon dioxide levels (now about 400ppm) have been much higher in the past, pre SUV days!!

( B ) What are the pros and cons of any temperature change.... Most science agree that warmer is far less harmful than cooling.

( C ) Can we do anything about it.... Very little.

( D ) And if so what is the cost.... Huge and guess who the big beneficiaries are, starting with Al.

( E ) Is it all worth trying to change the climate and creating all this fear about it. Definitely not, unless you're a 'Climate scientist on the receiving end' I mean, pop into the barbers shop and ask him if you need a haircut.. odds are he will say YES!

( F ) Who will suffer the most with efforts to reduce carbon dioxide? Again it will be the poor specially in developing countries.

Some things to consider:
You can cherry pick articles and links to justify any way you need to go on this subject but at the end of the day best to forget that and use some common sense and logic: (Rare as it is these days!)

Remember that the science was solid behind the following:

* The ‘discovery’ of a massive hole in the Ozone layer. Great cost to humanity trying to overcome that until it is proven that the holes are normal, always were there and naturally expand and contract seasonally. (Whoops, no money here let’s look for something else)

* In 1976 the scare was the start of global cooling! ( A few years later...Damn it, the joints getting warmer again, better drop that one...

* The millennium bug. Remember this little pearler. Planes will drop out of the sky, hospitals will shut down, riots in the streets, yada yada yada... What happed.. 4/5ths of bugger all except that an estimated $600 BILLION was scammed with this one.
And who got those dollars? Not me or you Gunga Din! (How many 100’s of hospitals, millions kids vaccinated / fed, etc with the billions these thieving scamming bastards got away with?)

* About the same time the grand daddy of them all was hatched, AGW. Global warming. This was going to be easy cos the temperature had been on a slight increase over the past few decades (ironically similar to rises earlier in the century but don't mention those!) A lot of predictions were made (most since proven wrong in time), governments throwing billions at 'the science' and carbon schemes.

Yes they were going to save the planet, just keep the money flowing and we will tell you what you want to hear. But bugger me that damned temperature increase stopped so an adjustment is needed, a new theme.. climate change is born. (Or should we say born-again cos after all this whole crap has become a religion!)

The point of all this?
Yes there is slight global warming but nothing like the promoters claim, (with virtually none of the science’s predicted rise over the past 20 years) and the climate has been changing since before our time so get over it.

And why won't any of the big shot promoters like Al Gore debate Lord Monckton? Because they know he will make them and their theories look stupid and they don’t want to bugger up their bottom line.

Wake up folks, this is one giant beat up. While based on a modicum of truth, it is powered along by the need for more power and much more money! A very clever scam!

Pete question in your opinion.

As an individual that has been forced to deal with a majority of your national power being alternative produces how were things last winter?
Would have been nice to fire up a couple of natural gas fires power stations wouldn't it ?
What was the economic cost ? And the cost in human suffering?

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by OzePete

...why won't any of the big shot promoters like Al Gore debate Lord Monckton? Because they know he will make them and their theories look stupid and they don’t want to bugger up their bottom line.

Lord Monkton... is the deniers' "Al Gore"? ... that never occurred to me before... Huh.

Neither of them are scientists, so it's not a debate I'd have much interest in. Though it could be interesting as spectacle. Like MMA or WWE.