60 share
very high reader interest
<<<< One of the most recognized Alarmist picture, depicting a lone polar bear (as if close to extinction - he is not), clinging to his last hope for life, as if he forgot how to swim. The picture is as much a scam as is the anti-intellectual Alarmist Movement. After all, they are the ones who push this picture.
Here is a summation of the
arguments I see as germane to the issue of global warming as a crisis that we
can control or reverse. I ask the reader
to challenge what I briefly state, then
follow that challenge with a second challenge,
in essence, debating with
yourselves. Whichever argument you
cannot defeat is your truth.
I begin with this claim: The Alarmists’ view of global warming is man made (the opinion is man-made or invented). I do
not believe in consensus science, nor do
I believe in a theory that cannot consistently predict outcomes. I know that consensus science has been wrong
in the past, in my lifetime, on many occasions, in matters of the environment (acid rain, the hunger bomb, the ozone whatever, the mini ice age), health, economics and social/domestic
structure. I know that alarmists padded
the books for more than a decade, with
that story breaking in 2009. I expect
government generated warming charts to say the exact same thing when dealing
with warming rates and historical evaluations,
and they do not I know that 30%
of climate scientists do not believe in the alarmists' views (there is more than one) of warming while
believing, at the same time, that warming is happening. I
do not believe that warming has occurred in 12 of the past 16 years. I believe that the current warming rates
began near the turn of the 1900's, back
in the day before we became an industrialized nation. I believe that warming is occurring
throughout our solar system giving posit to the claim that the Sun is the primary cause of our excessive warming trends. I believe that warming, on our planet, is regional,
not global. I believe that Al
Gore, is a moron, with no moral
core. I believe that Central Planning
pays its supporters and punishes its detractors, that the 70 percenters, those climate
scientists who are Alarmists, are not
free to challenge and are more motivated by the funding they receive than
truth. And I believe that the 97% figure
used to frame faux unanimity within the warming community is a totally fabricated
number, I believe that Alarmist Warming
is a potential money pit for the Socialist Pigs who are running the
industrialized world. And I believe that Millennial and Xer generations have
lost the ability to think critically,
i.e., to criticize their own positions in the name of a search for
truth; they have no sense for the dialectic*
pursuit of truth, they (too often) gobble up
what they read and do so without bothering to question their sources or “the
facts.” Instead,
they pretend that this process of intellectual compliance is, somehow, related to "critical
thinking." Their problem? They are lazy, intellectually.
My readers are typical to the
national population, and have made their
feelings clear. Warming as a preventable
event is in the hands of Mother Earth,
not man; warming as a political
priority is at the bottom of every list I seen over the course of the past five
years, at least, in our country. Australia Spain
Make note that his particular post is an ongoing project for today, Saturday, June 28. I will be adding Google links and more commentary (perhaps), throughout the course of the morning. ~ Editor.
Good article. Hope you add the linkage you were talking about. It is true, the Left really has lost the argument except for the fact that their use of political power is abusive and very difficult to stop, in view of the fact that they are a lawless bunch of crooks.
ReplyDeleteThe reader can "Google" "global warming," click on images at top of menue page. There are a number of idiot pics, sheer propaganda.
ReplyDeleteNonsense. He made his prediction in 1981. By 1996-97 the sharp rise in warming rates came to a standstill, And, Hanson does not know the primary cause for warming. Warming is occurring at similar rates on Mars -- no CO2 there, dude.
ReplyDeleteTalk about anti-intellectual..
ReplyDeleteThe Mars theory debunked:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192
Complete list of Smithsons anti-intellectual BS:
https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
The shrinkage of the Martian South Polar Cap is ALMOST certainly a regional climate change, and is not any indication of global warming trends in the Martian atmosphere. - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192#sthash.rzquiPlY.dpuf
DeleteThe comment (above) is taken from your referenced article at Real Climate.org. First, the article admits Martian warming. Secondly, Real Climate argues for "regional warming" on Mars, as if Earth's warming is not regional, as well. Third, he does not allow for the role of the Sun as to Earth’s warming rates, a consideration that is accepted as fact by everyone article I have read on the subject. The fact that Earth’s warming is rooted in regional events, as well as in the case of Mars, works against the author’s claim, that and the fact that the author cannot bring himself to write in absolute terms, forced to write “ALMOST certainly,” wording that speaks of a certain ambivalence as to cause and effect. Understand that “almost certainly’ is not “certainty” at all.
There is no logical reason to believe that admitted Mars-specific causes (such as dust storms on the planet) exclude the role of the Sun. Nor, does this article go so far as to make that claim. Although the author might want to make the claim, he does not.
Two statements, here, are important to this discussion:
In a report written by Sallie Baliunas, chair of the Science Advisory Board at the George C. Marshall Institute, we have this: "Pluto, like Mars, is also undergoing warming . . . . . it is likely not the sun but long-term processes on Mars and Pluto" causing the warming, until until more information is gathered, Baliunas said, it is difficult to know for sure.
Pat Michaels, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, has this to say about Martian warming: "What is the internal dynamic that is warming Mars? Given the fact that there are not a lot of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions on Mars, and given the fact that new research indicates that 10 to 30 percent estimated conservatively of Earth's recent warming is due to increased solar output, the Martian warming may support that new research."
Your list of "myths" is pathetic. A few points are agreeable. Others have been debunked in our discussions, here, at Midknight Review. Example: the list tries to counter the fact that warming is not a current period event by pointing to the record heat of 2010. Basically, it claims that warming must be on the increase because of 2010. Problem: It ignores the years before and after 2010 - all recording less mean temps than 2010. In fact, 2010 is just one of four years out of the past 16, that saw higher averages greater than 1998. Another example: the lists claim that " The last decade 2000-2009 was the hottest on record. True enough. BUT, the RATE OF TEMP INCREASES has not advanced during that same period of time. Nor did this "hottest decade on record" effect all regions of Earth during that decade, nor did that "hottest decade on record" do anything but increase the growing season. I could go on, but the list, itself, is laughable. It cherry picks opposition arguments, misrepresents its "facts," and ignores, totally, the more germane issues effecting polemic outcomes.
Delete