Jan 21, 2015 -- 3:31PM, wombleoz wrote:
Plenty of censoring going on here - not that I necessarily mind slabs of information from other sources not being allowed - I'd much rather read people's own thoughtsHad a bit of a read about your man Patrick J Michaels BJ - interesting he seems to agree the planet is warming at about the same rate as most but is contesting the impact of that. Reasonable I'd suggest, I don't necessarily agree with those that say the planet will be totally destroyed by climate change in the next few years either. In saying that, I'd still go with the majority scientific view that it's much more likely to have negative rather than positive outcomes for the planetNo surprise he is funded, at least in part, by the fossil fuel industry
Not really my man, just a man high up in the scheme of things, who disagrees with the mainstream bullsiht. He doesn't agree with the rate it is going up at all, in fact his point in that video, is that the figures are manipulated to project much higher than reality, for temperature alone, and that all the other scare tactics, are actually completely wrong and unjustified.
I used him to counter AFL's stance that every scientific organisation in the world is in agreeance. The fact is, they aren't.
Should we cut down on pollution? Fcuk yeah we should. Is the temperature going up? Who knows. There is that many doctored numbers going around that it really isn't easy to tell. The fact that we have had the coldest winter in 130 years would suggest a bit for mine.
And if the temperature is going up, that is in no way conclusive that we are causing it, given the constant change in climate since the dawn of time.
Al Gore, for the record is not a climate scientist, but that term is really given by governments in their funding models to try and prove some sort of point. Al Gore however, was the biggest PR campaign in regards to this, and most changes, taxes, opinions, etc are loosely based on his PR campaign.
Putting a movie out to schools, suggesting the sea levels will rise up to 6 metres, and here is what will happen to the worlds population if we don't trade carbon credits now, is one of the biggest frauds of recent times. Yes, sea levels could rise up to 6 metres. They have been up around 7 metres in the past, but if they do, it won't be for thousands of years, and is likely to do so anyway. There was so many ridiculous scare threats fed down the throats of the worlds children, that it is very hard to take any of it seriously.
And the carbon trading scheme that was put in place? Well, it was put in place by Al Gore, and members of Enron, who of course had a history of trading false commodities to fleece the public of billions (trillions?), yet were somehow in charge of saving the planet?
The whole thing is a crock of siht. From the 97% rubbish, to the science is settled. There is nothing settled about it. A high proportion of scientists that were surveyed (nowhere near representative of all the scientists in the world, enter 9/10 dentists recommend Colgate), indeed agreed that in their opinion humans contribute in some way to the climate of the day. But there is nothing agreed about how much, nothing agreed about if it will even have an impact, and nothing agreed on what could be done about it.
They could ask of course, if they believed that the population of rats in their opinion contributed to the climate of today, and I believe the same answers would prevail, that yes, they probably do impact it in some way. That could come down to 1 trillionth of a degree over the next 50 million years, but of course, they are still contributing, so the same scare campaign could be worked around that, as technically, of the people asked, they all had an opinion, no matter what contribution they believed.
They could ask the same about women. Do women contribute to the climate? 97% of scientists agree. Well wouldn't they? If that is the figure that agree with humans (clearly isn't but let's stick with it), then maybe we should tax women because of their contribution.
Termites for example, apparently emit 1,000% carbon dioxide as humans do. So wouldn't it be a lot easier to simply do something about the termites? Why aren't they considered the enemy to the planet? Because they are dead fcuking broke. Simple as that.
None of this has anything to do with the climate. This comes down to the same thing as everything else. How do we scare the population into happily handing us over more of their money?.