http://business.financialpost.com/o.../wcm/56dabd50-71cd-4dc9-b6d3-f589307be291/amp Climate derangement has claimed another celebrity astrophysicist. Last month, Stephen Hawking, author of A Brief History of Time, declared that Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris agreement meant that earth could become like Venus, where it rains sulphuric acid and temperatures reach 250 C. Now Neil DeGrasse Tyson, “science communicator” and host of the 2014 TV series Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey, has claimed that climate science is as certain and predictable as next week’s solar eclipse. DeGrasse Tyson tweeted: “Odd. No one is in denial of America’s Aug 21 total solar eclipse. Like Climate Change, methods & tools of science predict it Last week, celebrity economist Paul Krugman suggested in the New York Times that climate skepticism was the fruit of an “Axis of Evil” that combines fossil fuel money (which is apparently much more corrupting than government funding), ideological rejection of any and all regulation, and contrarian egoism. Krugman wrote that he couldn’t think of a single climate skeptic who was acting in anything but bad faith. But has he ever spoken to a climate skeptic? Then again, why would he bother? They’re all evil.
You are an idiot. edited: I recently had the pleasure of shared mini-van trip to a resort with a Chilean oil engineer, his wife an industrial chemist and a boomer Bob who retired from a Corvette dealership a few years back. Boomer Bob was determined to convince the engineer and chemist that they did not know their jobs. He 'felt' that man...climate..sun spots.. Up against three (me too) who disagreed in the end he just said to the effect "thanks for nothing, I paid to relax and you ruined my day".. he started the whole thing. Oh yeah, and then Boomer Bob is scratching his crotch going on about some tropical bacteria... I'll spare the details but he had effectively nappy rash from not wearing underwear in the heat and drops of piss burning his skin. Antibiotics have completely thrown the demographics, there are too many Boomer Bobs around. The unprecedented numbers of old attention seeking codgers are fertile ground for lobbyists on many topics.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...s/news-story/b124752820c94822915f94917e6566b2 Media’s silence of the climate scams MAURICE NEWMAN The Australian 12:00AM August 1, 2017 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on email Share more... 310 Comments How lucky to have gatekeepers such as the ABC, SBS and Fairfax Media to protect us from the likes of Climate Depot founder Marc Morano, recently here promoting his documentary Climate Hustle? Thanks to mainstream media censorship, Morano’s groundbreaking film, which promised a heretical fact-finding journey through the propaganda-laced world of climate change, was denied publicity. Described as “the most dangerous documentary of the year”, Climate Hustle “exposes the myth of the 97 per cent ‘scientific’ consensus, debunks hype about temperature and extreme weather, and introduces viewers to key scientists who have reversed their views and converted to scepticism”. Fortunately, Al Gore had no difficulty finding the media opportunities Morano couldn’t, to push his apocalyptic movie An Inconvenient Sequel. It continues the scaremongering of Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Like the first, it’s full of scary weather videos and features, Gore reminding us that we are at a tipping point with the result that our children will inherit a world of “stronger storms, worsening floods, deeper droughts, mega-fires, tropical diseases spreading through vulnerable populations in all parts of the Earth, melting ice caps flooding coastal cities, unsurvivable heat extremes, and hundreds of millions of climate refugees”. Facts don’t stand in the way of a good story. But, then, most who consider this movie a “must see” will take delight in having their fantasies and prejudices confirmed. The movie shamelessly promotes green tech, a field in which Gore is a successful investor. His advocacy and political access are believed to have made him the world’s first “carbon billionaire”. But that’s the self-serving nature of climate-change politics. It confers wealth and privilege on its boosters. Doubters are banished. Take the generous financial rewards and status showered on scientists who discover human links to global warming. Under the cloak of academic authority, junk science regularly passes uncritically into the mainstream as credible research. School and university students are indoctrinated with the catastrophic warming faith “so that science can advance” (and sceptics can be silenced). Crony capitalists are encouraged to invest in renewable energy through attractive taxpayer subsidies. We are told the crippling costs of renewable energy targets are the price we must pay to save the planet. Energy poverty and the premature death of the elderly through lack of affordable heating are downplayed or accepted as collateral damage. Much of the media volunteered as propagandists, refusing to report fully and accurately, or even to report at all. Extreme weather events continue to be hyped as proof of reckless human activity when no causation is proved. Against predictions and record human emissions, the decline during the past decade in the frequency and intensity of storms and other natural catastrophes goes largely unreported. And there has been no measurable warming for the past 19 years. Who knew? But catastrophic climate change is about political power. Using Malthusian environmental ideology, the climate movement is aimed at what can loosely be called the Western way of life. How else to explain the Paris Agreement under which, for their sins, rich nations must hobble their economies and compensate poor countries so that the largest emitters, China, India and Russia, can emit freely? Donald Trump spotted this idiocy and quit the agreement. But even the thuggishness of the climate establishment can’t hide the intellectual corruption behind it all or the willingness of scientists to compromise their work for generous grants and political influence. We’ve had access to thousands of emails and computer files from leading scientists revealing data manipulation, collusion to keep raw data from independent examination and scientific journals pressured to reject contradictory studies. Australian scientist Jennifer Marohasy recently outed the Bureau of Meteorology for limiting the lowest temperature that an individual weather station can record. If this is accepted practice, no wonder American physicist Charles Anderson declares “it is now perfectly clear that there are no reliable worldwide temperature records”. And on it goes. John Theon, retired chief of NASA’s Climate Processes Research Program and responsible for all weather and climate research, testified that “scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results”. Then, politically inspired to have the maximum possible impact on world leaders attending the 2015 Paris climate conference, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued an exaggerated report based on unverified data. Esteemed scientist Hal Lewis resigned in disgust from the American Physical Society, saying climate change “is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long career”. Despite it all, climate science is defended to the death. Invalidate it and “the greatest moral challenge of our generation” unravels and, with it, a compelling reason to meddle in others’ lives. While publicly politicians refuse to discuss the science, they feast on its alarmism. But they cannot forever feign ignorance of the scientific fraud deeply embedded in its core. Australians are waking up. They are growing suspicious of Labor premiers genuflecting to Gore, promising zero net emissions by 2050 and questioning the Turnbull government’s virtue signalling for staying with the Paris Agreement. Slowly it is dawning on them that they and future generations are being played for fools, paying a horrifying price and enduring pointless pain, for spurious “save the planet” propaganda
its so funny reading things like that from lefties. I wonder how and why you can think you are so correct without science? Where does that smugness come from? Do you all believe science or press releases? I wonder how anyone can be convinced there is man made global warming when peer reviewed science shows that co2 levels correlate well but trail change in ocean temps. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658 and there is no peer reviewed science showing man made co2 causes warming that does no relied on failed models but there are dozens of peer reviewed papers stating at least some warming is caused by the sun and tides.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm E-mail this to a friend Printable version Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013' By Jonathan Amos Science reporter, BBC News, San Francisco Arctic summer melting in 2007 set new records More details Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice. Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. yep apparently no ice in the artic anymore...
Northern Indiana hit record low of 41 degrees Satuday morning, breaking record set over 100 yrs ago. Per local newscast. No global warming here, futurecurrents!
So CO2 is NOT a greenhouse gas? Not that I expect the OP or any Trumper/right wing moron to know what a greenhouse gas is.