Newest First
By Ryan on 07-28-11 @ 1:20 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
By Mark W. on 07-28-11 @ 1:50 pm
This article bordered on criminal frivolity. You ought to be disbarred.
Arctic Scientist Under Investigation
http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-arctic-scientist-under-investigation-082217993.html
By GrrrGraphics on 07-28-11 @ 1:54 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-arctic-scientist-under-investigation-082217993.html A federal wildlife biologist whose observation that polar bears likely drowned in the Arctic helped galvanize the global warming movement during the last decade was placed on administrative leave while officials investigate scientific misconduct allegations.Global warming/climate change alarmists are finding out the so called science is bad data and researchers with “integrity issues.”
By GATEKEEPER on 07-28-11 @ 3:05 pm
‘Chicken Little’ sold out to Political Correctness a long time ago!As we should be preparing for the coming Ice Age this fraudulent ‘Science’ and the perps behind it need to be exposed. Just follow the money, power and control these Ecoloons are trying to slide by the dumbed down and it will become a clear as the Ice Crystals coming from AlGores Jet(s) what a fraud and hoax this is!
By Native on 07-28-11 @ 3:43 pm
Ryan - The author of your article recieves part of his paycheck from Exxon/Mobile. He makes a living by writing EDITORIALS that contradict climate change. You really should try to do a better job determining what is FACTUAL and what is OPINION. This data hasn’t even been analyzed by anone credible yet and that is why you can’t find anything out there on the web about it.
By Native on 07-28-11 @ 3:48 pm
MB - nobody disputes NATURAL climate change over LONG periods of time. Maybe if you took the time to actually learn what every scientific body in the whole friggin world agrees on, then you would realize that we are just speeding up the process. Nobody every said that we are doing it all on our own.
By Native on 07-28-11 @ 4:00 pm
GATE - So you think Al Gore has more influence that Big Oil? One man versus the most powerful companies on the planet? Its crazy how such a fat, unlikable man can be so influential. I mean, the oil industry spends billions every year to try to improve their image. They throw millions at conservative think-tanks that hire people to write editorials that try to convince people that science is corrupt and climate change is a conspiricy. But Al Gore makes a 90 minute documentary that is all scientific data and has zero negativity, zero slander, and zero finger-pointing and he is the bad guy.
Deny anything you don’t want to believe. Ignore anything that makes you uncomfortable. Avoid accepting any truth that might force you to change…. whatever makes you sleep at night, I guess.
By GATEKEEPER on 07-28-11 @ 4:40 pm
Come On! AlGore comes from Oil and Coal Money. He’s just one of the puppets used by the ‘Carbon Credit Crowd’, Goldman Sacs, GE and the other money interests trying to create a new crisis to redirect and control the future direction of the Energy and offshoot Markets! No one disputes Natural Climate change…Sun Spot activity, volcanic activity and Natural ongoing seepage of gases and oil are responsible for the vast majority of climatic activity. Mother Nature cleanses the miniscule amount that man produces.
Just look at the way the world works and it’s not to hard to connect the dots to see that this is another scare tactic by yet another special interest group to control Power and Capital!
The fresh mountain air I breath, the natural spring water I drink and the land that has never been treated with any unnatural chemicals lets me sleep very well!!
By Vud on 07-28-11 @ 8:24 pm
” There is no real scientific controversy about this. “
By Eileen Wright on 07-29-11 @ 8:01 am
There is obviously BIG money in pushing this AGW trend. One clue to it’s veracity is that the argument breaks down on to political affiliation with most skeptics being conservative. The tactic taken by their opponents is most often to silence debate and slander the messengers.
This quote is from another revealing article that finds NASA data disputing Al Gore’s “facts”:
...‘the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth’s atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth’s atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.’
The full article is here: http://blogs.forbes.com/jamestaylor/2011/07/27/new-nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-in-global-warming-alarmism/
Speaking again of political separation in debates; It seems like a majority of the people who believe in global warming believe that our government can keep spending money it doesn’t have, use credit to pay off debt and maintain a ponzi scheme life style with no long term impact.
By inthemiddle on 07-29-11 @ 8:23 am
On my property I have a mixture of Ponderosa Pine, Douglas Fir and Tamarack. About ten years ago the Tamarack started dying. At first I thought it was drought related so I started irrigating the woods closest to my house, this was of no help and the trees continued dying only at a faster rate. About 6 years ago I contacted the state and they gave me the name of an arborist. After the arborist examined the dead and dying trees he the checked the live ones for bugs and disease. The live trees were determined to be healthy and no conclusion was made as to why they were dying. Now 6 years later over one third of the healthy trees are dead and many more are dying. I am not an arborist or climatologist, but after watching my Tamaracks die I have come to the conclusion that this is related to global climate change. The winters are shorter and warmer and the summers are hotter (this year is an anomaly )After talking to many other property owners that have Tamaracks I have come to the conclusion that within twenty years they (tamaracks) will be gone from the lower elevations in our valley. Why is it that after several hundred thousand years it is only now that these trees can no longer live in areas that they have thrived in for so long. There is to much evidence out there that shows that man is a least partially responsible for climate change, sticking your head in the sand and denying it won’t help our grand children.
By GATEKEEPER on 07-29-11 @ 8:53 am
All living things have a life cycle and an expiration date! The Sahara Desert is the largest desert in the World! Six Thousand years ago it was a forest and to my knowledge there were no SUV’s or Gas Fired Coal plants that caused it’s demise.
By Native on 07-29-11 @ 8:55 am
Eileen, that article was already posted in this very blog. So I will make my point again; you just quoted an EDITORIAL written by a guy who makes a living by writing these sort of things.
The NASA employee that went public with these readings (that haven’t been analyzed yet), is a outspoken right-winger that is on a conservative crusade and is well known for cherry picking the 0.01% of real scientific data that appears to contradict the FACT that our habits are having and adverse effect on our planet.
BTW: When did all you guys start looking at actual research? I was getting used to the most common denier approach of: “It is colder than normal today so obviously global warming is a conspiricy”.
By GATEKEEPER on 07-29-11 @ 10:39 am
The same hysterics were foisted on the masses in the 70’s and 80’s about Global Cooling and mass starvation that was eminent because of climate change and growing population. The Scientific and Psychiatric community has been infected with secular Progressivethink. Anyone who has dared to resist has been ostracized! These far left wing kooks control the grant money and decide who’s papers get published. There agenda has been exposed, there ‘theories’ are being shredded and all the have left is the same old sorry Sol Lewinsky tactic of blaming the so-called Right Wing!!
By Eileen Wright on 07-29-11 @ 12:09 pm
Native- You skipped over the cited scientific study ( http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf ) and then took the Saul Alinsky tactic of targeting the individual as “right wing”. While that works in community organizer circles, it does nothing to support the often basis assumptions of Agenda 21 supporters.
Another point that I would make is that an ‘editorial’ as you call it from a man with the credentials of James M. Taylor has much more credibility that a media ‘news piece’ written by a partisan hack or, a ‘hard hitting’ expose by a partisan TV network talking head with no knowledge on the subject what-so-ever.
By Native on 07-29-11 @ 1:06 pm
All that scientific study does is provide data that “may (or may not)” prove that the studies that scientists have used to verify man-made global warming “may (or may not)” be corrupted. Basically it says that clouds get in the way and skew the satellite data so it should be dismissed as erronous.
James Taylor has just taken those scientists HYPOTHISIS and ran with it like it is gospel. And it doesn’t matter that he has credentials. The Unibomber had credentials. This guy works for the Heartland Institute which has a very specific agenda and its not to deliver facts and news to the people. Its sole purpose is to protect the images and drive the agendas of the organizations that donate to it (like Exxon/Mobile).
I don’t know who Saul Alinsky. The scientist that produced the study is named Roy Spencer and it is a very obvious fact that he is right wing. For instance, the guy wrote a book that deny’s evolution, what is more right wing than that?
By Eileen Wright on 07-29-11 @ 1:09 pm
When you label someone ‘right wing’ in order to disprove their comments and claim to not know who Saul Alinsky is, you destroy your own credibility.
By Native on 07-29-11 @ 1:22 pm
Just for you I looked up Saul and now I’m absolutely sure that I have never heard of him in my life. How does that destroy my credibility anyway? Thats a pretty obscure reference.
How in the world could you say he is not right wing? Scientists have a certain responsibility and that is to only endorse conclusions that they can back up with science. In both this case, and his case of denying evolution, all he has done is cherry pick a fraction of data and worked like hell is find flaws in it. He is not out there to prove anything, he just wants to discredit any information that does not support his ideology and than he feeds it to conservative think-tanks before anyone else in the science community has a chance to contest it.
By T-Bone on 07-29-11 @ 2:01 pm
Native, How dare you not know who Saul Alinsky is? That man is the greatest mind of our time. He was nominated for a nobel prize, is an Olympic swimmer, astronaut, starred in a blockbuster movie, translated ancient Mayan texts, dicovered a cure for polio, and has found a solution to world hunger. I mean what kind of nut job left winger doesn’t know who Saul Alinsky is? You mine as well never post another comment, your credibility has been utterly destroyed. The only chance that you have of restoring it is to use lots of CAPS LOCKS, !!!!!!, and telling people that “I told ya so”. After that Gatekeeper will allow you thru the entrance to looneyville.
By Vud on 07-29-11 @ 3:10 pm
Eileen wrote:
” When you label someone ‘right wing’ in order to disprove their comments…”
” The tactic taken by their opponents is most often to silence debate and ...slander the messengers.”
=========================
Come on Eileen (ooh ooh come on Eileen) :
Go back and read your ‘Sources’ article; “The Alarmists” are referred to many times more than even you let on in your quotes.
” the central premise of alarmist.”
” less heat is being trapped in the earth’s atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict…”
“...and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.”
You are confusing the political, blogosphere with the true scientific discussion.
By the way I see “The Heartland Institute” changed it’s policy and No Longer allows access to info on it’s donor base.
By Eileen Wright on 07-29-11 @ 4:25 pm
The editorial is a commentary written to elicit attention. Using a word like alarmist in references to those who believe they are sounding an alarm is probably done for emphasis. Kind of like Obama calling the Tea Party supporters, “extremists”.
By Mark W. on 07-29-11 @ 4:28 pm
Pweeeese!! Pweeeese!!! It’s fow the childwen!!!
Do you think we might be able to pay for abortions to offset our carbon footprint in the future? Wouldn’t that be cool?
By Eileen Wright on 07-29-11 @ 4:36 pm
Mark W. -
While you comment sarcastically, I’d not be at all surprised to learn such an idea has been discussed in Davos, Buenos Aires and Chicago.
By GATEKEEPER on 07-29-11 @ 4:40 pm
In all fairness to the Gang of Three Eileen, the term Crackpot would be more appropriate!
By Mark W. on 07-29-11 @ 4:44 pm
Oh come on, it’s their wet dream.
By GATEKEEPER on 07-29-11 @ 5:38 pm
To put this all in proper perspective; Remember the last Movie in the ‘Planet of the Apes’ sequel when Charlton Heston finds the remains of the NY subway tunnels and discovers the humans living beneath the ground! He then confronts this fat balding mutant dressed in a 28th century muumuu who is the High Priest guarding and worshiping this Giant Abomb! Well, the present day version of that would be the self appointed High Priest of the pagan earth worshipers..ALGore!
By Mark W. on 07-29-11 @ 8:30 pm
Every one of these pro-global warming dolts is also pro-legalized abortion. It’s a religion. And science has nothing to do with any of it.
It’s AbortoWarmingism. Worshipped at the Altar of Obamacare. Don’t forget to tithe. (From your neighbor’s pocket.)
By Vud on 07-29-11 @ 8:48 pm
Obama - The TeaParty - Abortion - Planet of the Apes!
It’s like talking to a box of springs with a twist of lime.
Thanks for the unexpected chuckle guys. But I gotta do a little hedging for Monday ( those crazy R’s! ). Later.
By Eileen Wright on 07-29-11 @ 9:04 pm
Vud - Good on you for hedging. Make sure you don’t touch endangered species, intrude on any buffer zones, use fossil fuel combustion equipment, electric powered trimmers, pesticides, non recyclable disposable bags, vehicles to haul away waste, or electrically powered computers to read this message.
By Mark W. on 07-29-11 @ 10:27 pm
Please kill yourself so we get a nice long Indian Summer.
By Mark W. on 07-30-11 @ 12:03 am
But then again, that might actually mean living by your beliefs. Much better to semi-retarded shyster lawyers to get others to do the suffering for you.
By Mark W. on 07-30-11 @ 1:42 pm
Yeah, that was bad. But it’s hard to better underscore the seriousness of what this attorney tried to do like a thief in the night, while we were all sorting our garbage, tending our organic gardens and charging our Volts.
Was he trying to stop the slaughtering of the innocents in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Was he trying to feed the hungry in Detroit?
No. He was offering up to our court system a tool of near total control based on pop “science.” A doctrine that, by the way, brooks no real intrinsic curb and no real accountability to its enforcers. What they feel needs to be done, will be done. And the science will appear. Offering it up. To Government. While you were picking up garbage by the side of the highway, changing out your lightbulbs and weatherstripping your doors.
Thank God there was some iota of responsibility left in our court system. And thank God there is some level of accountability remaining somewhere deep in the bowels of Government and academia that seems to be revealing the lies upon which this insane doctrine has been constructed. Because unless this revelation continues, in 10 years when the next fool brings a suit like this, there won’t be anyone left with the sense to stop it.
Unless you all recognize the seriousness of what you’re wishing for, and the danger of Government justifying its actions with pop theories, and then speak strongly and in no uncertain terms against it.
Sure. It all starts out fun. Intelligent people shouldn’t need reminding of how it ends up.
Peace.
By Craig moore on 07-31-11 @ 2:08 pm
There is this recent analysis of the effect of humankind on climate: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/loehlescafetta.pdf
Warming of 0.66C/Century due to Anthropogenic factors is hardly alarming. To claim otherwise smacks of deceit.
By bocephusj57 on 07-31-11 @ 2:26 pm
On the other hand,
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/07/29/global_warming/index.html
By GATEKEEPER on 07-31-11 @ 3:09 pm
I can’t stop laughing!!! SALON!!!! They make the New York Times look Conservative.
By Eileen Wright on 07-31-11 @ 3:20 pm
bo - I thought you had reservations about citing an editorial from an opinion writer. Well, there you go again ...and Saloon no less, the watering hole of Kool-Aid drinkers.
By Eileen Wright on 07-31-11 @ 3:53 pm
The Hill is reporting that Rep. Henry Waxman (D) CA is calling for a national climate change education push.
There is not much more that can be added to this in proving it is a scam and a hoax. Henry Waxman is seldom right and rarely truthful about anything.
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/172479-top-house-democrat-calls-for-national-climate-change-education-campaign
By GATEKEEPER on 07-31-11 @ 3:55 pm
Salon has about as much credibility as Mad Magazine! It’s a Postmodern version of ‘The Book of Mao’‘. The old Soviet ‘Pravda’would be considered ‘Right Wing’ compared to Salon!
By bocephusj57 on 07-31-11 @ 4:18 pm
Please show me where the author expressed his personal opinion on the topic of his article.
By GATEKEEPER on 07-31-11 @ 5:05 pm
Waxman my actually be the only living proof they have of the damage Global Warming can cause to human DNA! This guy supports the other Delta Drinking Water kook Pete Starks insistence that there is no Creator, evolution is a fact, and Waxman, the missing link..proves it!
By bocephusj57 on 07-31-11 @ 5:21 pm
I want to see the long-form birth certificate for this alleged creator and his alleged nazarethan anchor baby.
By GATEKEEPER on 08-01-11 @ 5:37 am
Like a quivering bowl of Globally warmed Jello your rebellious spirit will get that opportunity!
By Eileen Wright on 08-01-11 @ 2:46 pm
So you know-
US government starting to implement the policies of the United Nation’s plan for global management of people and resources known as Agenda 21
In Late May, the DOT proposed a rule change for farm equipment, and if it this allowed to take effect, it will place significant regulatory pressure on small farms and family farms all across America – costing them thousands of dollars and possibly forcing many of them out of business. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), part of the Department of Transportation (DOT), wants new standards that would require all farmers and everyone on the farm to obtain a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) in order to operate any farming equipment. The agency is going to accomplish this by reclassifying all farm vehicles and implements as Commercial Motor Vehicles (CMVs).
(It is also important to note here that DOT Secretary Ray LaHood holds a seat on the newly created White House Rural Council. A powerful group whose members have ties to George Soros and The Center For American Progress.)
The move by the DOT appears to be “legislation through regulation.” By reclassifying all farm vehicles and implements as Commercial Vehicles, the federal government will now be able to claim regulatory control over the estimated 800,000 farm workers in America, at the same time, overriding the rights of the states.
This proposed change literally means family farms could no longer legally allow young workers, not old enough to drive and seniors who no longer drive on the public streets, to operate a tractor… even on the family’s private property.
By pro-whom on 08-02-11 @ 10:15 pm
Glacier Park will soon have the name Glacier-less.
Eileen- what kind of farmers do you mean? Most big farmers already have a CDL for driving Semi-Trucks.
Corporate farming and shopping is the future as long as you shop at big boxes, like walmart, over mom and pop shops. And, since few people want to live in rural areas. Who can afford to by? Corporations, like? McDonalds.
By bopho on 08-03-11 @ 1:13 am
Hey all you climate change deniers - here are facts you cannot dispute. Never before in the history of this planet has there been over six and a half billion people using massive amounts of fossil fuels to feed and operate the machinery of an ever faster growing population.
To deny even the possibility that this might have a negative effect on the planet we all inhabit is not only ignorant but also arrogant.
And it is downright silly to believe that this some kind of one-world government conspiracy. The probability that global warming is happening is widely accepted worldwide. Talking about it and discussing it rationally does not mean that U.N. stormtroopers are suddenly going to materialize and tell how many times a day we can flush our toilets.
And don’t forget, the affects of global warming will not stop at America’s shores.
By GATEKEEPER on 08-03-11 @ 5:08 am
Maybe if the 6.5 Billion people took shorter breaths that would solve the problem!
By GATEKEEPER on 08-03-11 @ 7:20 am
Think of all the Hot Air and Methane Gas we could eliminate if we closed down DC!
By Eileen Wright on 08-03-11 @ 4:33 pm
bo- You should understand the imbalance are still at with industrialization.
From Geneva 2009:
” One third or more than 2 billion of the world’s population cooks over open fires fueled by wood or other biomass materials. This contributes to degradation of our forests, produces smoke related diseases that cause more deaths than malaria and puts women, in particular, in danger while debilitating their strength and enslaving them to fuel gathering.
Approximately 1.1 billion people do not have access to improved water and 2.4 billion have no basic sanitation. More than 4 billion serious cases of diarrhea occur each year world wide and case more than 2 million deaths, most of them children.”
~~~ The people cooking and heating with wood and biomass materials are clearing the forests around their villages at an alarming rate. They and their families are breathing smoke and off gassing of the dung they burn which is polluting their lungs along with the atmosphere.
We have the technology at our fingertips that can make a big difference in our future. But, in many cases we are working against ourselves politically by looking at entrepreneurs as evil. Or, by trying to force investment in pipe dreams that need subsidization in order to do what only appears to be productive or profitable.
By bopho on 08-03-11 @ 10:31 pm
Eileen - Who looks at entrepreneurs as evil? I sure don’t and I don’t know of anybody who does. My father was a successful entrepreneurs and I started a business in Kalispell that employed over 24 people.
Those entrepreneurs and managers that I look up to - such as Steve Jobs of Apple, Larry Page and Sergey Brin of Google, and Richard Bronson of the Virgin Group have all accepted the reality of climate change and instead of screaming conspiracy they are doing what they can to prepare their companies for the future.
Apple is one of the most successful companies in the world because they innovate - constantly. The great General Motors went into bankruptcy because they spent millions upon millions of dollars lobbying against higher mileage standards instead of spending that money on building better and more efficient vehicles that would satisfy both the American market and the world market.
Back on June 2, Business Week ran an article about the Subaru factory in Indiana. Here is a paragraph from that article:
“In its 22-year history—a period that has spanned three recessions, a global financial crisis, massive U.S. auto bankruptcies, and the departure of Isuzu, a founding partner, from the operation—Subaru Indiana has rolled out more than 3 million vehicles and has never resorted to layoffs. Instead, it’s given workers a wage increase every year of its operation. Staffers also enjoy premium-free health care, abundant overtime ($15,000 each, on average, in 2010), paid volunteer time, financial counseling, and the ability to earn a Purdue University degree on-site—all in a state that has lost 46,000 auto jobs and suffered multiple plant foreclosures in the past decade. And the truly astonishing thing is how it achieved all this: through a relentless focus on eliminating waste. “This is not about recycling, or a nice marketing to-do,” says Dean Schroeder, a management professor at Valparaiso University who has studied the plant. “This is a strict dollars-and-cents, moneymaking-and-savings calculation that also drives better safety and quality.”
The entire article is available here:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_24/b4232068147070.htm
Like other successful companies, Subaru doesn’t fear the coming realities of the future, but instead is taking them in stride and making the necessary changes that benefit the company.
By Eileen Wright on 08-04-11 @ 7:19 am
Props to Subaru. I’d like to see someone there or at Apple begin to do something about bringing modern utilities to the third world before they cook away the forests. Maybe that has to wait until a plethora of new taxes and international regulations are levied on advanced societies, though.
By JB on 08-12-11 @ 9:03 am
You know, its outrageous that people still deny the existence of global warming; after all, those who know that global warming exists are some of the most important thinkers of our time - Leonardo DiCaprio, Paris Hilton, Ed Begley Jr., and let’s not forget good ol’ Arnold Schwartzenegger.
And who are these climate change deniers anyway? Just complete nobodies like Professor Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist at MIT; professor and atmospheric physicist Fred Singer of the University of Virginia; Dr. Roy Spencer, a climatologist who formerly worked with NASA; Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics…
By Eileen Wright on 08-12-11 @ 11:06 am
Humans really can’t have that much impact on altering the climate to change the alarming threats Al Gore detailed in his film. Especially, when you realize that those who demand it work very hard against the corporations that may have the potential to do something significant.
But, we all know that the agenda behind this propaganda campaign is to control populations, not climate.
By RussCrowder on 04-25-12 @ 7:44 am
A new United Nations study recently concluded that because of “Global Warming”, the next cycle for a new Ice Age is at least 1500 years away…Isn’t Global Warming great !!!
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.