What these global warming fearmongerers just can't seem to wrap their heads around is that the temperature records have been compromised. For some time. For example, it took surfacestations.org to do the first actual physical survey of all the temp stations, and they found that 60% of them were installed incorrectly and yielding bad data. NASA last year eventually separated the datasets - a pristine one that has the "good stations", and a flawed one with the "bad stations". The pristine set shows no warming, the flawed one, does. Guess which one they used in their pronouncements of 2015 being the "warmest year on record"? And when 2015 still wasn't warm enough, Hansen decided to fold in ocean temp data prior to 2012, to knock those years lower. That's why the graphs for "2010 being the hottest year on record) are different than the 2010 graphs included in the "2015 is the hottest year ever". They keep moving the goalposts, massaging data, and ignoring the inherent problems with the data. This is why all the raw data streams from the satellites do not show any warming for the last 17 years...but the released dataset, does. (Never mind the fact the utter uselessness of simply taking an average temp of the planet - it's a far more complex system than that math would allow for.) All it takes for anyone to realize this, is simply to pay attention. That's it. I've been studying this literally since 1998; and it's been one fraud after another.
Lead acid batteries are the most recycled product in the country. They are not nearly as dangerous when caught in a fire, as lithium....and not only does Tesla want them in cars, they want thousands of them in your home. Think of that the next time you see a house fire...or see all the destruction those wildfires are causing right now. Gigantic clouds of toxic lithium. Awesome.
I can't understand what has the Left so in an uproar about Trump's joke about the Russians "finding" her emails. First of all, it really was a dig on the press, if you listen to the whole quote; he jokes about how *they* will reward Russia. Second, Russia already said they have her emails from SecState - they did so on RT back in May. So the hack, if it happened, has already happened. Years ago. And thirdly, Hillary said they were just personal stuff, nothing secret. So, how does this work, exactly - is Trump asking Russia to time travel back in time and hack the State Dept, just to retrieve Hillary's yoga-related emails? You guys gotta do better than this - this whole "trump is super duper double secret Russian agent" meme is l-a-m-e.
Look, I'm all for "new" energy, as long as it's better energy. I don't care what color it is. But regardless of our source of energy, clearly our energy storage technology is almost archaic. The sheer amount of lithium that this plant will consume borders on ridiculous. And every house fire and car fire that involves these batteries is going to be a toxic mess. And the landfills....
Dude, that's from mediamatters - possibly one of the most leftwing in-the-tank-for-the-DNC organizations out there. It's literally been created and run by hillarybots. All they have is cognitive dissonance.
It's not an excuse or and explanation; it's a diversion or a deflection. Assange has come out and said that the Russians are not responsible - he knows the source. But...about two months ago, RT (pretty much the state-sponsored media in Russia, the "new Pravda") disclosed that Russia has all of Hillary's emails, and may yet release them. And there appeared to be a lot of intrigue between the Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB) Alexander Bortnikov and Chairwoman of the Council of Federation Valentina Matviyenko over the issue of releasing to the Western media "tens-of-thousands of top secret and classified emails obtained by the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR)". So, they may *all* be right...Russia may not have been responsible for this dump, Hillary may still be lying about their involvement as a deflection, and Russia may still have emails to release. But any way you look at it, it's another global mess...and she's in the middle of it. Again.
It's not 1965. There is no racial voter discrimination anymore. The first black president has been elected twice. States with voterID elected him, and had increased black turnout, as well. Now, the problem isn't KKK members requiring poll tests...it's black panthers standing outside voting booths and lecturing "crackers" on the coming "reign of the black man". Even the UN's election website lists voterID as a requirement for certifying an election as "free and fair". It's 2016 - and time to move on.
Always a bad idea. Just remember...the NAZIs had hundreds of scientists and peer-reviewed research proving the superiority of the aryan race. And Progressive scientists back in America were busy proving how eugenics was the best policy to deal with "undesireables".
"religious bigots, racists, misogynists, and people that can't utilize facts or logic to save their life"
You see...that's how i KNOW you don't have a clue. You don't win arguments by first demeaning the humanity and intelligence of your opponent. Put down the koolaid and actually speak to one of those "horrible rightwingers"...I think you'll be surprised how much they know.
Just another case of Progressive Privilege. The utterly amazing thing is how blatant and public it all is....and how little shame the Progressives have over it. Nevermind the fact that between Comey's punt and the Benghazi report, virtually everything the Right has been saying for the last three years has been vindicated. But, who cares, right? As long as we stick it to those "horrible Republicans", right? Who cares if we elect the most flawed corrupt person ever to seek the office. It's all about getting those evil rightwingers!
Nobody cares what color your energy is; they just want *better* energy. Let us all know when you have it. Until green energy can compete on the same playing field, WITHOUT SUBSIDIES, then this is all just fanboy talk.
These are the sorts of comments which destroy my karma...because nobody wants to hear the voice of reason, nobody has any memory, or is able to do a simple google search.
These reefs have been "in danger" and scientists have been "caught by surprise" every 2-3 years for the last 20 years. Just do a simply google search and you'll see when the greenies were worried about dredging in 2014:
In truth, the reefs are growing and shrinking, as they always have, for hundreds of thousands of years. All this is is more fearmongering for the green religion, because they have "demands" they want met. Just like we've been hearing about the "thousands of acres" of rainforest being destroyed since the early 90s - which has far exceeded the actual acres of total rainforests twice over - yet there seems to still be quite a bit of rainforest left. It's all just fearmongering. It's really that simple.
Dude, if you can't figure out how to hear both sides of an argument...then what is the point? There's a petition website with over 32,000 verified signatories. There's dozens of news stories going back a decade or more, with various groups of scientists coming forward. There's Hal, who resigned from the head of the geophysical union over the warming fraud. Just search for "reigned from IPCC" and you're bound to find one of the hundred or so that have left the IPCC in disgust. Jesus, it's not hard.
Explain? Why you can't form a complete sentence? There are plenty of scientists that disagree. There are literally TENS OF THOUSANDS. You just choose not to listen to them. The IPCC itself has lost over 180 lead authors since it began...they all left with the same complaint: the system was rigged to fit a political narrative. Science was being cherry-picked. The same corrupt peers are reviewing each other's papers. It's a mirage.
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the historyWhen people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” – Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
“Temperature measurements show that the [climate model-predicted mid-troposphere] hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them!”- UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Steven M. Japar, a PhD atmospheric chemist who was part of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second (1995) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports, and has authored 83 peer-reviewed publications and in the areas of climate change, atmospheric chemistry, air pollutions and vehicle emissions.
UN IPCC Scientist Kenneth P. Green Declares ‘A Death Spiral for Climate Alarmism’ – September 30, 2009 – ‘We can expect climate crisis industry to grow increasingly shrill, and increasingly hostile toward anyone who questions their authority’ – Dr. Kenneth Green was a Working Group 1 expert reviewer for the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001
‘The whole climate change issue is about to fall apart — Heads will roll!’ -South African UN Scientist Dr. Will Alexander, April 12, 2009 – Professor Alexander, is Emeritus of the Department of Civil and Biosystems Engineering at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, and a former member of the United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters.
“I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol,” Christy told CNN on May 2, 2007. – Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, served as a UN IPCC lead author in 2001 for the 3rd assessment report and detailed how he personally witnessed UN scientists attempting to distort the science for political purposes.
“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic campClimate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” – Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
“The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” – South African Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.
“The claims of the IPCC are dangerous unscientific nonsense” – declared IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr Vincent Gray, of New Zealand in 2007. Gray was an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990, author of more than 100 scientific publications.
Sorry, but Hansen's predictions are a bit more complicated. His premise was originally a "doubling of CO2", but at later dates made reference to a doubling of HUMAN-CAUSED CO2. The Fanatical Environmental Left frequently confuses these two things. Human-caused CO2 has doubled, just in the last 10 years, but human-caused CO2 is only 4% of the total CO2 volume - which the Left does not want to mention, since it's kind of invalidates their whole premise: that human-caused CO2 is the problem. So they straddle the two figures, pretending one is the other when convenient.The facts are the ocean burps and swallows more CO2 every year than all of humanity produces...and scientists still haven't figured out how much.
Just like I never doubt the ability of humans to take a fraud and elevate it to a religion. It happens all the time - from weight loss scams, to fortune tellers, to scientology.
What is it about you people that you think you can simply discount mountains of evidence and raw data just by cueing up the spooky music, and bitching about that nefarious villian, "Big Oil". Make sure you say "Big Oil" that out loud with a sneer, so everybody knows how you feel about it.
A few things you forget: the Green Industry is now a 7 TRILLION DOLLAR market; it must be just as corrupt, by your srgument. And of all the oil companies in the world, the only two private ones are American - and they control less than 10% of the market. All the other oil companies are state-run. they are socialist enterprises.
This whole mysterious evil plan by oil companies to hide the truth about your doom prophecies is just to deflect from you actually having to study the issue yourself, or defend it.
Sorry, but he elucidated his case rather well, and listed several points to back up his skepticism. You can do nothing but ignore all of them.
Not only would it be easier for you to criticize Nye's position if "he wasn't correct"...it would also be easier for you to defend him, if he were. Nye is degrading the entire argument. If I say to you that I have problems believing in AGW because of the raw satellite data, and your retort is, "you're just a stupid denier that hasn't realized that all the scientists agree with me"...I have WON that argument. You do realize that, right?
Noting that Hansen was incorrect in his prediction of doom, does not "prove that he is correct". That's sheer idiocy. It means you should be skeptical about trusting any other "predictions" he offers. Especially ones he refuses to provide his data for.
You've offered not one factual rebuttal of anything he stated - instead you strut around, ridicule, and condemn. The sad thing is you like to call that "science".
again, federal loans are not subsidies. Subsidies don't have to get paid back.
But, seriously...? All you're doing is making a case for less government intervention - there are no private utilities in the US.
I don't understand it because I've never heard of it before. Any sources? Because as far as I've seen, no one has tried to build any nuke plants in quite some time because the regulatory hurdle is too great. Why even attempt to build a plant if you know it's going to get shut down before it even starts up? And then you neglect to mention who it is that is shutting it down - the environmentalists, right? So, are they "in on it"?
People that use mic drops are simply drama queens. If you need to use a mic drop to make a point, you don't have a point - all you can do is shut down the conversation and run away with your tail between your I egs
Slashdot Mirror
What these global warming fearmongerers just can't seem to wrap their heads around is that the temperature records have been compromised. For some time. For example, it took surfacestations.org to do the first actual physical survey of all the temp stations, and they found that 60% of them were installed incorrectly and yielding bad data. NASA last year eventually separated the datasets - a pristine one that has the "good stations", and a flawed one with the "bad stations". The pristine set shows no warming, the flawed one, does. Guess which one they used in their pronouncements of 2015 being the "warmest year on record"? And when 2015 still wasn't warm enough, Hansen decided to fold in ocean temp data prior to 2012, to knock those years lower. That's why the graphs for "2010 being the hottest year on record) are different than the 2010 graphs included in the "2015 is the hottest year ever". They keep moving the goalposts, massaging data, and ignoring the inherent problems with the data. This is why all the raw data streams from the satellites do not show any warming for the last 17 years...but the released dataset, does. (Never mind the fact the utter uselessness of simply taking an average temp of the planet - it's a far more complex system than that math would allow for.) All it takes for anyone to realize this, is simply to pay attention. That's it. I've been studying this literally since 1998; and it's been one fraud after another.
Lead acid batteries are the most recycled product in the country. They are not nearly as dangerous when caught in a fire, as lithium....and not only does Tesla want them in cars, they want thousands of them in your home. Think of that the next time you see a house fire...or see all the destruction those wildfires are causing right now. Gigantic clouds of toxic lithium. Awesome.
I can't understand what has the Left so in an uproar about Trump's joke about the Russians "finding" her emails. First of all, it really was a dig on the press, if you listen to the whole quote; he jokes about how *they* will reward Russia. Second, Russia already said they have her emails from SecState - they did so on RT back in May. So the hack, if it happened, has already happened. Years ago. And thirdly, Hillary said they were just personal stuff, nothing secret. So, how does this work, exactly - is Trump asking Russia to time travel back in time and hack the State Dept, just to retrieve Hillary's yoga-related emails? You guys gotta do better than this - this whole "trump is super duper double secret Russian agent" meme is l-a-m-e.
Look, I'm all for "new" energy, as long as it's better energy. I don't care what color it is. But regardless of our source of energy, clearly our energy storage technology is almost archaic. The sheer amount of lithium that this plant will consume borders on ridiculous. And every house fire and car fire that involves these batteries is going to be a toxic mess. And the landfills....
Dude, that's from mediamatters - possibly one of the most leftwing in-the-tank-for-the-DNC organizations out there. It's literally been created and run by hillarybots. All they have is cognitive dissonance.
It's not an excuse or and explanation; it's a diversion or a deflection. Assange has come out and said that the Russians are not responsible - he knows the source. But...about two months ago, RT (pretty much the state-sponsored media in Russia, the "new Pravda") disclosed that Russia has all of Hillary's emails, and may yet release them. And there appeared to be a lot of intrigue between the Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB) Alexander Bortnikov and Chairwoman of the Council of Federation Valentina Matviyenko over the issue of releasing to the Western media "tens-of-thousands of top secret and classified emails obtained by the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR)". So, they may *all* be right...Russia may not have been responsible for this dump, Hillary may still be lying about their involvement as a deflection, and Russia may still have emails to release. But any way you look at it, it's another global mess...and she's in the middle of it. Again.
It's not 1965. There is no racial voter discrimination anymore. The first black president has been elected twice. States with voterID elected him, and had increased black turnout, as well. Now, the problem isn't KKK members requiring poll tests...it's black panthers standing outside voting booths and lecturing "crackers" on the coming "reign of the black man". Even the UN's election website lists voterID as a requirement for certifying an election as "free and fair". It's 2016 - and time to move on.
Always a bad idea. Just remember...the NAZIs had hundreds of scientists and peer-reviewed research proving the superiority of the aryan race. And Progressive scientists back in America were busy proving how eugenics was the best policy to deal with "undesireables".
"religious bigots, racists, misogynists, and people that can't utilize facts or logic to save their life" You see...that's how i KNOW you don't have a clue. You don't win arguments by first demeaning the humanity and intelligence of your opponent. Put down the koolaid and actually speak to one of those "horrible rightwingers"...I think you'll be surprised how much they know.
Just another case of Progressive Privilege. The utterly amazing thing is how blatant and public it all is....and how little shame the Progressives have over it. Nevermind the fact that between Comey's punt and the Benghazi report, virtually everything the Right has been saying for the last three years has been vindicated. But, who cares, right? As long as we stick it to those "horrible Republicans", right? Who cares if we elect the most flawed corrupt person ever to seek the office. It's all about getting those evil rightwingers!
Nobody cares what color your energy is; they just want *better* energy. Let us all know when you have it. Until green energy can compete on the same playing field, WITHOUT SUBSIDIES, then this is all just fanboy talk.
ahhhhh....and here we have another leftwing time traveling psychic from the future, here to inform us about how it all works out [eyeroll]
These are the sorts of comments which destroy my karma...because nobody wants to hear the voice of reason, nobody has any memory, or is able to do a simple google search.
These reefs have been "in danger" and scientists have been "caught by surprise" every 2-3 years for the last 20 years. Just do a simply google search and you'll see when the greenies were worried about dredging in 2014:
http://www.ibtimes.com/great-b...
Then, UNESCO took the reefs off the endangered list in 2015:
http://www.ibtimes.com.au/unes...
And that was after the reef supposedly lost "half it's coral" in 2012:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/03/...
And that was after the other "wakeup call" in 2011:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/03/...
And so on, and so on, and so on.
In truth, the reefs are growing and shrinking, as they always have, for hundreds of thousands of years. All this is is more fearmongering for the green religion, because they have "demands" they want met. Just like we've been hearing about the "thousands of acres" of rainforest being destroyed since the early 90s - which has far exceeded the actual acres of total rainforests twice over - yet there seems to still be quite a bit of rainforest left. It's all just fearmongering. It's really that simple.
Dude, if you can't figure out how to hear both sides of an argument...then what is the point? There's a petition website with over 32,000 verified signatories. There's dozens of news stories going back a decade or more, with various groups of scientists coming forward. There's Hal, who resigned from the head of the geophysical union over the warming fraud. Just search for "reigned from IPCC" and you're bound to find one of the hundred or so that have left the IPCC in disgust. Jesus, it's not hard.
Simple. You're measuring *global* CO2. Human-caused CO2 is only 4% of the global volume.
Explain? Why you can't form a complete sentence? There are plenty of scientists that disagree. There are literally TENS OF THOUSANDS. You just choose not to listen to them. The IPCC itself has lost over 180 lead authors since it began...they all left with the same complaint: the system was rigged to fit a political narrative. Science was being cherry-picked. The same corrupt peers are reviewing each other's papers. It's a mirage.
the only reason it is expensive is because of the draconian regulatory structure. Not to mention there aren't trillions in green energy subsidies.
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the historyWhen people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” – Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
“Temperature measurements show that the [climate model-predicted mid-troposphere] hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them!”- UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Steven M. Japar, a PhD atmospheric chemist who was part of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second (1995) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports, and has authored 83 peer-reviewed publications and in the areas of climate change, atmospheric chemistry, air pollutions and vehicle emissions.
UN IPCC Scientist Kenneth P. Green Declares ‘A Death Spiral for Climate Alarmism’ – September 30, 2009 – ‘We can expect climate crisis industry to grow increasingly shrill, and increasingly hostile toward anyone who questions their authority’ – Dr. Kenneth Green was a Working Group 1 expert reviewer for the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001
‘The whole climate change issue is about to fall apart — Heads will roll!’ -South African UN Scientist Dr. Will Alexander, April 12, 2009 – Professor Alexander, is Emeritus of the Department of Civil and Biosystems Engineering at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, and a former member of the United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters.
“I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol,” Christy told CNN on May 2, 2007. – Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, served as a UN IPCC lead author in 2001 for the 3rd assessment report and detailed how he personally witnessed UN scientists attempting to distort the science for political purposes.
“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic campClimate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” – Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
“The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” – South African Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.
“The claims of the IPCC are dangerous unscientific nonsense” – declared IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr Vincent Gray, of New Zealand in 2007. Gray was an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990, author of more than 100 scientific publications.
Sorry, but Hansen's predictions are a bit more complicated. His premise was originally a "doubling of CO2", but at later dates made reference to a doubling of HUMAN-CAUSED CO2. The Fanatical Environmental Left frequently confuses these two things. Human-caused CO2 has doubled, just in the last 10 years, but human-caused CO2 is only 4% of the total CO2 volume - which the Left does not want to mention, since it's kind of invalidates their whole premise: that human-caused CO2 is the problem. So they straddle the two figures, pretending one is the other when convenient.The facts are the ocean burps and swallows more CO2 every year than all of humanity produces...and scientists still haven't figured out how much.
Just like I never doubt the ability of humans to take a fraud and elevate it to a religion. It happens all the time - from weight loss scams, to fortune tellers, to scientology.
What is it about you people that you think you can simply discount mountains of evidence and raw data just by cueing up the spooky music, and bitching about that nefarious villian, "Big Oil". Make sure you say "Big Oil" that out loud with a sneer, so everybody knows how you feel about it. A few things you forget: the Green Industry is now a 7 TRILLION DOLLAR market; it must be just as corrupt, by your srgument. And of all the oil companies in the world, the only two private ones are American - and they control less than 10% of the market. All the other oil companies are state-run. they are socialist enterprises. This whole mysterious evil plan by oil companies to hide the truth about your doom prophecies is just to deflect from you actually having to study the issue yourself, or defend it.
Sorry, but he elucidated his case rather well, and listed several points to back up his skepticism. You can do nothing but ignore all of them. Not only would it be easier for you to criticize Nye's position if "he wasn't correct"...it would also be easier for you to defend him, if he were. Nye is degrading the entire argument. If I say to you that I have problems believing in AGW because of the raw satellite data, and your retort is, "you're just a stupid denier that hasn't realized that all the scientists agree with me"...I have WON that argument. You do realize that, right? Noting that Hansen was incorrect in his prediction of doom, does not "prove that he is correct". That's sheer idiocy. It means you should be skeptical about trusting any other "predictions" he offers. Especially ones he refuses to provide his data for. You've offered not one factual rebuttal of anything he stated - instead you strut around, ridicule, and condemn. The sad thing is you like to call that "science".
again, federal loans are not subsidies. Subsidies don't have to get paid back. But, seriously...? All you're doing is making a case for less government intervention - there are no private utilities in the US.
I don't understand it because I've never heard of it before. Any sources? Because as far as I've seen, no one has tried to build any nuke plants in quite some time because the regulatory hurdle is too great. Why even attempt to build a plant if you know it's going to get shut down before it even starts up? And then you neglect to mention who it is that is shutting it down - the environmentalists, right? So, are they "in on it"?
People that use mic drops are simply drama queens. If you need to use a mic drop to make a point, you don't have a point - all you can do is shut down the conversation and run away with your tail between your I egs