Is Gobal Cooling a Continuing Threat?

[sac beh]

I need no sooth. thanks anyhow...

lol

 

[Ben Tokin]

Dissent in the ranks?

SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

ICECAP NOTE: Another nail in the AGW coffin in the Climate Depot special report below.

Two additional interesting HEADLINES worth noting:

The temperature this morning in Cancun dropped to 51F, breaking the record low for the date of 64 set in 2000. It was also the coldest December morning in Cancun history (old record 52F). Gore must have been there at least in spirit. Recall last year, the IPCC Copenhagen meeting was hit with a blizzard and frigid temperatures. The IPCC moved the meeting to Cancun to avoid another embarrassment and feel the global warmth.

In England, the UKMO’s Dr. Vicky Pope was trapped at Gatwick by a heavy snow on her way to announce 2010 may be the warmest on record. She noted they found some warmth previously undiscovered in the oceans (ocean heat is sneaky that way). Well during the last two weeks (last week of November and first week in December), the temperatures in the longest temperature record in the globe (Central England temperatures (CET) was the coldest in the entire record for that period going back to 1659 (the Little Ice Age).
-------------

Climate Depot

More than 1000 dissenting scientists (updates previous 700 scientist report) from around the globe have now challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. This new 2010 320-page Climate Depot Special Report—updated from 2007’s groundbreaking U.S. Senate Report of over 400 scientists who voiced skepticism about the so-called global warming “consensus”—features the skeptical voices of over 1000 international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC.

This updated 2010 report includes a dramatic increase of over 300 additional (and growing) scientists and climate researchers since the last update in March 2009. This report’s release coincides with the 2010 UN global warming summit in being held in Cancun.

The more than 300 additional scientists added to this report since March 2009 (21 months ago), represents an average of nearly four skeptical scientists a week speaking out publicly. The well over 1000 dissenting scientists are almost 20 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

The chorus of skeptical scientific voices grew louder in 2010 as the Climategate scandal—which involved the upper echelon of UN IPCC scientists—detonated upon on the international climate movement. “I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple,” said noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin shortly after the scandal broke. Climategate prompted UN IPCC scientists to turn on each other. UN IPCC scientist Eduardo Zorita publicly declared that his Climategate colleagues Michael Mann and Phil Jones “should be barred from the IPCC process...They are not credible anymore.” Zorita also noted how insular the IPCC science had become. “By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication,” Zorita wrote.

A UN lead author Richard Tol lead author grew disillusioned with the IPCC and lamented that it had been “captured” and demanded that “the Chair of IPCC and the Chairs of the IPCC Working Groups should be removed.” Tol also publicly called for the “suspension” of IPCC Process in 2010 after being invited by the UN to participate as lead author again in the next IPCC Report.

Other UN scientists were more blunt. South African UN scientist declared the UN IPCC a “worthless carcass” and noted IPCC chair Pachauri is in “disgrace”. He also explained that the “fraudulent science continues to be exposed.” Alexander, a former member of the UN Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters harshly critiqued the UN. “‘I was subjected to vilification tactics at the time. I persisted. Now, at long last, my persistence has been rewarded...There is no believable evidence to support [the IPCC] claims. I rest my case!” See: S. African UN Scientist Calls it! ‘Climate change - RIP: Cause of Death: No scientifically believable evidence...Deliberate manipulation to suit political objectives’

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract?loc=interstitialskip

 

[Ben Tokin]

Another dissenter:

Signs that show Man Made Global Warming is Definitely Still Happening

By James Delingpole

Dec 10, 2010

As your boiler breaks down, your pipes freeze, your car won’t start, your Ocado delivery fails to arrive, your train is cancelled, your neck is broken after slipping on black ice and you lie in an emergency ward waiting for a doctor to turn up only to learn that they’re all off today because of the weather, you might be forgiven for thinking that all this has something to do with global cooling, changes in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, and the decline in sunspot activity perhaps auguring a new Maunder minimum.

But you couldn’t be more wrong.

“It’s all actually a sign that man made global warming is very much a live issue and that there’s more of it happening than ever,” says a top scientist, who holds the British record for securing grant-funding for global warming research projects so he must know what he’s talking about.

“Look at the Met office,” the scientist goes on. “They’ve just told us that 2010 is the hottest year since records began in 1850 and even though the stupid Central England Temperature record tells us something quite different and even though the year hasn’t actually finished yet they must know what they’re talking about and they definitely can’t have fiddled the data because the Met office is part of the government and they wouldn’t lie or get things wrong which is why that barbecue summer was such a scorcher.”

The big problem is, the scientist said, is that the public are really stupid. They think just because Dr David Viner of the Climatic Research Unit said in the Independent in 2000 that soon there’d be no snow because of global warming, when what he actually meant was that soon there’d be lots of snow and that this would be “proof” of global warming. The interviewer just missed out the word “proof” that’s all because journalists are lazy that way.

Then the scientist issued a cut-out-and-keep guide of Signs That Show Man Made Global Warming Is Definitely Still Happening And That Cancun Won't Be An Almighty Flop.

1. Warm weather

2. Cold weather

3. In-between weather.

4. Dark skies at night

5. Light skies in the morning

6. An unpleasant moist/damp/wet sensation when it rains

7. Ice appearing when the temperature drops below zero

8. Clouds rolling across sky in all sorts of funny shapes, some days like cotton wool, other days in streaks, and on some days not there at all.

9. Ursine subarboreal toilet activity

10. Strong new evidence of ultramontane sympathies at the Vatican

 

[HempKat]

Come on Ben we get the point, alot of people incorrectly think that unusually cold weather in places that are supposed to be warm is proof there is no global warming. You don't need to keep putting up cut and paste after cut and paste of idiots that make this incorrect assumption. We get it and thank you for showing us that quite a few people are really that stupid, even some claiming to be scientists.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

...

 

[Ben Tokin]

Some of you may find this article interesting. It is a telling history of climate observation and media reporting.

Cancun Climate Catastrophe Story Has a Long History

Dec 09, 2010

By Art Horn, Meteorologist

Currently the annual Climate Catastrophe Party is marching along in Cancun, Mexico. Do they really need to do this every year? It does make for a nice all expenses paid vacation. At this latest doom fest some 20,000 delegates from around the world are doing their best to keep the scary story of man made global warming, pardon me, climate change alive. I’ve been around long enough to remember a time when global warming was a non issue. In fact it was the very real threat of another Ice Age that was making headlines in the 1970s. That’s right, it was the complete opposite of today’s predicted climate disaster. With that in mind I decide to do a little investigation into the comings and goings of predicted environmental cataclysm. What I found is that this has all happened before. The reporting of climate catastrophe has been going on for over 120 years. What's fascinating about the reporting is that it has encompassed the full range of temperature, searing heat and bitter cold, both have been reported as real and potentially deadly. Before you shape your opinion on global warming by digesting today’s headlines you might want to consider the following.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says the world is warming at an unprecedented rate. The irrefutable results of this global temperature heat wave will be starvation, drowning of coastal cities, mass extinctions, war and the death of billions. These warning come to us from many reliable sources including all forms of news media. We have been alerted to this climate catastrophe for two decades now. Surely all these respected and long lived newspapers, magazines and television networks can be trusted to tell us what the current state of the climate is and what it will do. At least you would think so. Interestingly the history of climate reporting reveals many dirty little inconvenient truths that are about to be exposed.

When one looks back at the history of climate stories in the media you find a remarkably consistent and reoccurring theme. All of this reporting of unrelenting warmth and the dire consequences that will result is really recycled news headlines from the past! The global temperature has cycled from cold to warm to cold to warm again over the last 120 years. The news media, fed by reports from universities and government climate experts has diligently reported how these climate changes could spell disaster for mankind. These media cycles of impending climatic doom mirror the climate cycles themselves but with a roughly ten to fifteen year lag. It seems whenever the world warms up the volume of global warming stories increases to match the trend. Conversely when the climate cools the major media outlets pull up on their long johns and warn us of the next ice age. However it takes many years for the news reports to catch up to what the climate is actually doing.

In the news media whatever is popular will be immediately copied and embellished to fit each outlets particular brand. It’s simple, whatever sells, sells. Reporting of climate is no different and history proves it. On February 24th 1895 the New York Times reported “Geologists think the world may be frozen up again.” The story wondered if “Whether recent and long continued observations do not point to the advent of a second glacial period.” Later in 1912, shortly after the sinking of the Titanic by an iceberg the New York Times reported on a professor from a Cornell University. “Professor Schmidt warns us of an encroaching ice age.” On the very same day the Los Angles Times reported “Fifth ice age is on the way.” In addition the story said “Human race will have to fight for its existence against the cold.” The changing climate of the earth was a popular story then as it is now.

At this point you might ask if what they were reporting was true? A look at the temperature records from the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in England says yes. According to the temperature history, the earth was cooling from about 1875 to 1910, about 35 years of downward temperature. During this time there would have been more ice in the arctic and glaciers would have advanced. The stories were based upon what scientists of the day were observing and that was that it was getting colder. From there the media outlets made their own conclusions as to what this would bring to the future of climate and its effects on humanity. Many times it was disaster.

The oceans of the world contain more than one thousand time more heat than the atmosphere. The vast majority of that heat is in the tropical waters. When the oceans warm so does the atmosphere, when they cool global temperature follows. The Pacific Ocean covers a third of the earth’s surface and exhibits a dominant impact on the global temperature. Around 1920 the tropical Pacific Ocean began to warm. The impacts of such a warming are not always readily apparent. It takes years for glaciers and sea ice to react to the gradual ocean warming.

The huge social inertia generated by the ice age scare prior to 1910 continued to drive media fear stories of coming cold into the 1920s. Life was not as fast in those days and social change took place more slowly. On July the 3rd 1923 the Christian Science Monitor reported “Captain MacMillan left Wiscasset Maine announcing that one of the purposes of his cruise was to determine whether there was the beginning of another ice age as the advance of glaciers in the last 70 years would seem to indicate.” A year later on September 18th 1924 the New York Times declared the threat was real saying “MacMillan reports signs of new ice age.” Earlier that year on April the 6th the LA Times reported that Swedish scientist Rutger Sernander claimed there was “Scientific grounds for believing” that “When all winds will bring snow, the sun cannot prevail against the clouds and three winters will come in one, with no summer between.” Seems it was global cooling that was driving the headlines this time.

Unknown to anyone during this time was the fact that the Pacific was beginning to warm and would continue to do so until the mid 1940s. Reacting to this ocean warmth the temperature of the earth began to rise as well. Concurrently the ice age stories began to fade from the headlines. Then on March 11th 1929 the LA Times said “Most geologists think the world is growing warmer and that it will continue to get warmer.” On March 27th 1933 the New York Times headline read “The next ice age, if it is coming...is still a long way off.” In the same year meteorologist J. B. Kincer of the United States Weather Bureau published in the September Monthly Weather Review. He sited “Wide-spread and persistent tendency towards warmer weather.” He noted out of 21 winters from 1921 to 1933 in Washington D. C. 18 were warmer than normal and all of the past 13 were mild.”

During the early 1920s the Atlantic Ocean began its cyclic 30 year warming trend. This warmer water combined with the warmer Pacific pumped up world temperature to the point where everyone began to take notice. By November 6th 1939 the Chicago Daily Tribune published a story “Experts puzzle over 20 year mercury rise.” The story noted that “Chicago is in the front rank of thousands of cites throughout the world which have been affected by a mysterious trend towards warmer climate in the last two decades.” They knew it was warming but not why. On August 2nd 1952 the New York Times reported that Eskimos were eating cod, a fish not previously in their diet. The following year the Times reported that studies confirmed that summers and winters were getting warmer. Again unknown to the Times and other media outlets was the fact that the oceans were changing again.

The stories of a warming would continued into the late 1950s as the media inertia plowed forward adding to the popular warming stories of the 1930s and 40s. The Atlantic Ocean had been warming since the early 1920s. This warming was keeping the arctic milder by pumping warmer water northward trough the Gulf Stream. On February 15th 1959 the New York Times reported “Arctic findings in particular support theory of rising global temperatures.” However the temperature of the earth was not warming, it was falling. The massive and dominant Pacific had been cooler since the mid 1940s and would continue to be so into the middle of the 1970s. The climate data show that starting in the middle 1940s the earth began a multi-decadal cooling trend. Around 1960 the Atlantic began to cool again. Now both oceans were in their cooler phase. The two oceans were working together to chill the planet. It was not until later in the 1960s that the media began to really notice. It takes them a long time to drop popular stories and replace them with new untested ones.

On November 15th 1969 Science News quoted meteorologist Dr. J. Murray Mitchell Jr. “How long the current cooling trend continues is one of the most important problems of our civilizations.” Where have I heard that before? Mitchell continued “If the cooling continues for another 200 to 300 years the earth could be plunged into an ice age.” January 11th 1970 the Washington Post ran the headline “Colder Winters Herald Dawn of New Ice Age” The story read “Better get a good grip on your long johns cold weather haters, the worst may be yet to come.” Fortune Magazine reported in February of 1974 “It is the root cause of a lot of that unpleasant weather around the world and they warn that it carries the potential for human disasters of unprecedented magnitude.” Sound familiar? In the June 24th edition Time Magazine wrote “Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.” Newsweek said on April 28th 1975 said that “The earth’s climate seems to be cooling down.” Meteorologists were “Almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.”

So it looked like we were on the precipice of a new ice age with cataclysmic consequences for the world. Then, unannounced to all the Pacific Ocean began to warm again and so did the earth’s temperature. All the stories of the next ice age, the dramatic drop in food production and all the hardships to come were wrong...again.

The warming Pacific Ocean began to nudge the global temperature up in the late 1970s. This warming continued through the 1980s and the ice age stories were gone. By 1993 this story came from U.S. News and World Reports “Global Climate Change may alter temperature and rainfall patterns, many scientists fear, with uncertain consequences for agriculture. Time magazine wrote on November 13th 2000, 27 European climatologists have become worried that the warming trend “may be irreversible, at least over most of the coming century.” Newsweek joined the fray with this story in its August 8th 2005 edition “extremely dry weather of recent months has spawned swarms of locusts.” Was global warming the cause? The story concluded that “Evidence is mounting to support just such fears.”

On April 3rd 2006 Time magazine’s cover story with a picture of a lonely polar bear on a small piece of ice read “Be Worried, be VERY WORRIED. Climate change isn’t some vague future problem - it’s already damaging the planet at an alarming pace.” It also states on the cover in bold type “Earth at the tipping point. How it threatens your health. How China and India can help save the world, or destroy it.”

So from all of this what can we learn from 120 years of media reporting on climate change. Number one: The main stream media outlets are going to publish whatever sells. If someone publishes a story about the world getting colder and people buy it up you can be sure there will be many more stories touting the same headline. Number Two: There is a long lag between what nature is doing and what the media will report. The lag seems to be anywhere from 10 to 15 years after the climate changes. This is in part caused by the large amount of climate story inertia where stories about the past trends continue even though the climate trends have changed either to colder or warmer. The main stream media is slow to react to climate changes even though the evidence is clear. Number three: When all the news stories are about warming or cooling you can be sure it’s wrong.

When government agencies or United Nations Climate Change conferences warn you that the climate is changing you can be sure that is true. The climate is always changing but in what direction is the hard part. Based on the past reporting of these changes be it from global cooling or warming the trend will have reversed many years earlier than reported. Incidentally there has been no global warming for a decade. Get a good grip on your long johns. Maybe a trip to Cancun is not such a bad idea after all but I’ll wait until the delegates have gone home

 

[SpasticGramps]

We get it and thank you for showing us that quite a few people are really that stupid, even some claiming to be scientists.

So these UN scientist and climatologist who now disagree with the IPCC's report aren't really scientist in your estimation?

In order for you to consider them scientists they would have to tote the IPCC line on AGW? Were they scientists before they dissented against the IPCC and now they are not?

I'm just trying to find out what your definition of a scientist is. It sounds a lot to me like it is only someone who espouses an alarmist view of AGW? And if a "scientist" who was once with the IPCC then changes his mind he no longer is a scientist, he is just pretending to be a scientist??? He becomes ostracized as a "stupid" person all of a sudden.

That doesn't sound very scientific.

 

[trichrider]

a few more scientists refute your prediction...err...fabrication...uh, you won't check these anyway...I truly hope you are young and live long enough to discover the error of your ways.

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/246027

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14696

http://weather.mcconathy.com/12433.pdf

 

[Baba Ku]

I personally find it loads o' fun to watch them pop their tiny heads out of the little holes at the same time. And the collective narcissism is also great sport to watch.
Only professional clown troupes could be any more entertaining!
The saddest part, and the thing that worries me the most...is that most of these folks have the ability to procreate. Now THAT is what should worry most of us.

 

[sac beh]

The saddest part, and the thing that worries me the most, is that Baba Ku loves to come into a thread at the last hour posting tired, debunked arguments in the form of insults and pictures.

 

[sac beh]

By Art Horn, Meteorologist

Somebody wishes he had gone on to study climate science and not settled for being a weather guy all his life...

 

[ronbo51]

To even the most casual observer it is hard to jump on the climate change bandwagon unless you have a political agenda to fulfill. The earth has been WAY warmer in the past. It will be warmer in the future, but the one constant in the last few million years is COLD and ICE. It's funny how the global warming crowd uses data from the last hundred years or so to back up their claims of impending doom. The Little Ice Age was winding down by the mid 1800's after coming out of the coldest climate in 10,000 years. Remember Valley Forge and the cold those poor bastards went through. That was 350 years of bitter unending cold. That was the Little Ice Age. No wonder the last hundred years show rising temps generally. It could hardly have been colder. And how about we go back exactly 1000 years ago to the Midevial Warming Period. Remember the Vikings in Greenland and then the new world. They called it Vinland because of the grapes. Grapes in Newfoundland??? It was also known, until recently because of the politics of global warming, as the Climate Optimum, due to the prosperity and abundance of food. The temperature was up to 6 degrees warmer than RIGHT NOW. Climate modelers are unable to account for clouds, water vapor, precipitation in their models, so how accurate can they be. Notice that all the global warming goons are always Jonesing for more money to solve the problems. Universities have sold out science for grant dollars. The academic scandals involving the UN Climate Researchers have proven that Science cannot be trusted, Academia has sold out for a few shillings, and governments would love to have new taxes to spend on their homeys. Count me way the fuck out of this. Think for yourself.

 

[ibjamming]

To even the most casual observer it is hard to jump on the climate change bandwagon unless you have a political agenda to fulfill. The earth has been WAY warmer in the past. It will be warmer in the future, but the one constant in the last few million years is COLD and ICE. It's funny how the global warming crowd uses data from the last hundred years or so to back up their claims of impending doom. The Little Ice Age was winding down by the mid 1800's after coming out of the coldest climate in 10,000 years. Remember Valley Forge and the cold those poor bastards went through. That was 350 years of bitter unending cold. That was the Little Ice Age. No wonder the last hundred years show rising temps generally. It could hardly have been colder. And how about we go back exactly 1000 years ago to the Midevial Warming Period. Remember the Vikings in Greenland and then the new world. They called it Vinland because of the grapes. Grapes in Newfoundland??? It was also known, until recently because of the politics of global warming, as the Climate Optimum, due to the prosperity and abundance of food. The temperature was up to 6 degrees warmer than RIGHT NOW. Climate modelers are unable to account for clouds, water vapor, precipitation in their models, so how accurate can they be. Notice that all the global warming goons are always Jonesing for more money to solve the problems. Universities have sold out science for grant dollars. The academic scandals involving the UN Climate Researchers have proven that Science cannot be trusted, Academia has sold out for a few shillings, and governments would love to have new taxes to spend on their homeys. Count me way the fuck out of this. Think for yourself.

It's like talking to a wall man...nice summary.

It's ALL about the money...and the politics of power. Just like nearly everything else on this planet.

What prevents some people from seeing it? Denial? That it couldn't be as simple and as evil as all being for nothing but power and money?

A 100 year trend...isn't a trend when it comes to climate. Get that through your thick heads! It's alarmism...humans are GREAT at it! We act as a flock, all reacting to some perceived threat. It's why we let strangers fondle our and our 4 y/o children's junk...why we let strangers take nudie pictures of our wife...so we can travel. WTF is that all about? For safety? How about we let EVERY passenger carry a knife? Hijacking threat will be eliminated! But no...they'd rather CONTROL you...herd you like cattle. Fuck, with you people taking over...how far away IS soilent green? Us old fucks are going to be expensive to keep around...gotta cut some costs. Do you SEE the irony of "Government Social Security" and "Government Health Care"? A little conflict of interest maybe? Pay for their old age...but control whether or not they MAKE it to old age by controlling health care...what a racket!

It's ALL fixed but you don't know it...it's ALL fixed. Bought and paid for...results guaranteed! Or your money back... Your beloved science is a whore...a shill..."discovers" what the buyers want discovered.

Listen to ronbo51 if not me...listen to SOMEONE on the OTHER side for once. I listened to your sides story...and it doesn't hold up. Don't put your faith in others...or in "models". Models are written by people. Just as slot machines, voting machines...models can be programmed to spit out ANY result!

 

[sac beh]

Most of this has been addressed in past posts. The accusation of political motives is strange since the only people I see bringing political views into the discussion are science deniers.

Climate modelers are unable to account for clouds, water vapor, precipitation in their models, so how accurate can they be.

Changes in clouds will amplify the warming of the planet due to human activities, according to a breakthrough study by a Texas A&M University researcher.

While climate models had long predicted that the cloud feedback would amplify warming from human activities, until recently it was impossible to test the models using observations.

"This work suggests that climate models are doing a pretty decent job simulating how clouds respond to changing climates," Dessler says.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101209141231.htm

A few examples of water vapor and precipitation studies in climate science:

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch3s3-4-2-1.html
http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/1525-7541/5/1/pdf/i1525-7541-5-1-64.pdf
http://www.knmi.nl/publications/fulltexts/global_extremes_for_jgr.pdf
http://www.drinetwork.ca/extremes/documents/Groisman_et_al_2005_Global_Intense_precip.pdf

 

[sac beh]

It's like talking to a wall man...nice summary.

It's ALL about the money...and the politics of power. Just like nearly everything else on this planet.

What prevents some people from seeing it? Denial? That it couldn't be as simple and as evil as all being for nothing but power and money?

A 100 year trend...isn't a trend when it comes to climate. Get that through your thick heads! It's alarmism...humans are GREAT at it! We act as a flock, all reacting to some perceived threat. It's why we let strangers fondle our and our 4 y/o children's junk...why we let strangers take nudie pictures of our wife...so we can travel. WTF is that all about? For safety? How about we let EVERY passenger carry a knife? Hijacking threat will be eliminated! But no...they'd rather CONTROL you...herd you like cattle. Fuck, with you people taking over...how far away IS soilent green? Us old fucks are going to be expensive to keep around...gotta cut some costs. Do you SEE the irony of "Government Social Security" and "Government Health Care"? A little conflict of interest maybe? Pay for their old age...but control whether or not they MAKE it to old age by controlling health care...what a racket!

It's ALL fixed but you don't know it...it's ALL fixed. Bought and paid for...results guaranteed! Or your money back... Your beloved science is a whore...a shill..."discovers" what the buyers want discovered.

Listen to ronbo51 if not me...listen to SOMEONE on the OTHER side for once. I listened to your sides story...and it doesn't hold up. Don't put your faith in others...or in "models". Models are written by people. Just as slot machines, voting machines...models can be programmed to spit out ANY result!

Some of the most alarmist, politically-motivated content on this site comes from your posts. You're so deluded by your political views that you couldn't see that science is the greatest friend to cannabis and an enemy of prohibition.

I addressed ronbo51's concerns.

 

[JJScorpio]

I received a complaint that this thread had political posts, so I closed it until I had the time to read it.....

In my opinion over half the thread is political. Whenever people start discussing Al Gore and politics it becomes political. There's really no way to avoid it in a thread like this and it's topic......

So I'll reopen it, then wait for the arguing and complaints to start again because I don't have anything better to do than monitor this thread with all of it's drama and conflict......

 

[Ben Tokin]

Hey JJ, since I'm the thread starter and everyone has made their point, I would not be upset if you closed it. There is no place for this thread to go except downhill, but, thanks for your efforts and have a good day!

 

[grapeman]

a few more scientists refute your prediction...err...fabrication...uh, you won't check these anyway...I truly hope you are young and live long enough to discover the error of your ways.

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/246027

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14696

http://weather.mcconathy.com/12433.pdf

These articles, while true and factual, have little to no effect on the lemmings of the global warming crowd.

With the amount of money to be scammed by this crowd, they consider flaws within their faux science as just road bumps on their way to our wallets.

As for the few warming proponent posters here who continue to flag their ignorance by posting links to sites that have already been shown as flawed, well, this is our society at large.

We have people who don't believe our constitution does not specifically allow for the citizens right to own guns. We have people who think spending borrowed money with no way to repay the borrowed money a stimulas.

And we have scientists who treat phony global warming with such religious zeal, mounting evidence demonstrate to any clear thinking person that studies were skewed, numbers were fudged and tree rings were selectively used to arrive at bogus conclusions wanted.

And even though it is proven that all this faux science's target is our money and how "they" want to redistribute it, we have posters herein, who think they are smarter then the rest because they have become fully invested in flawed and totally incomplete science.

These posters cannot address any of the problems with any facts that show flawed studies or the cycles of weather patterns, patterns that cycle over decades and centuries.

So what's the point really? Some folks just want to sip kool-aid and some horses will not drink water.

 

[ibjamming]

Some of the most alarmist, politically-motivated content on this site comes from your posts. You're so deluded by your political views that you couldn't see that science is the greatest friend to cannabis and an enemy of prohibition.

I addressed ronbo51's concerns.

WHO is alarmist?!?!?!?!? YOU are saying the shy if falling, we're all going to die in a man made inferno! I'm saying to calm down and relax! How the FUCK is that alarmist?!?!?!?

Do you people KNOW how to fucking read? I mean COMPREHEND not just sound out the words!

Fucking UNBELIEVABLE! And TYPICAL...don't have an argument so change the subject. Call them a racist, an ALARMIST (???), a bigot, stupid, ignorant, ANYTHING except anything to help your case. Discredit! That's how you win!

I'm deluded that people with a lot of ambition get rich and powerful in business and then "retire" to politics and then make themselves available for "campaign contributions" from big multinational corporations and then sell us down the river for profit? That delusion?

Science isn't going to get Cannabis legalized...money will. When they do better with it lagalized than prohibited...THEN we'll see it legalized. You MUST push the "including Cannabis with the hard drugs isn't cost effective" angle. The "half the prison population is for a simple plant no worse than beer" angle. It costs us $300 billion a year for small time Cannabis offenders" angle.

Nobody cares that YOU want another way to get high. They say just get drunk...have some beers. It's not their thing...they don't care. Like most people with gay rights...they just don't care. Whatever happens...happens. But the MONEY...they want to keep the "get you high" monopoly. Get beer and liquor manufacturers on board. but THAT won't work either.

The REAL reason you'll never see Cannabis legalized is...

wait for it...

ANYONE can grow it in their back yard and NOBODY can make money for it. It would be grown in vacant lots by minors, and we can't have kids getting high that easily.

forget it being legalized no matter what "studies" say...


Remember...90% of the population believes in God. If you start the conditioning early enough...people will vehemently believe ANYTHING. YOU have been conditioned. I don't blame you...but I wish you would give it an objective critical evaluation.
That's just the cold hard facts of life...there are a WHOLE bunch more...but you refuse to believe those either!