The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Conservatism and climate science > Comments

Conservatism and climate science : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 24/6/2014

Given that they have had virtually a monopoly of the mass media, the government and the scientific academies, doesn't that point to a fundamental problem with the 'climate change' message?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. 26
  9. Page 27
  10. 28
  11. 29
  12. All
OH DEAR EXTREEME CHRISTINE DOING THE GRIST MILLS
she now Is wearing glasses to hide the growfeet[even some botox]
but there she is dressed up to sell it.sell what?..sell the last gasp

trying to rally the troops/for monday
and the greens role in this cant be understated
one second its kill the deal/next its saying our whole attention should be focussed on animal farmng.

the two poINTS DONT MEET
but there ya go recall that 3 percent lie[when its really fifty percent]
john huesoon quoted the much debuted true cost of solar=3 percent
the same lying spin/hes rich enough to be snide oh where is abc fact check

the facts are system upgrades = solar system upgrades [ie making the green-grid]

what they expected was give away free cardon credit
[to the big poluters]..then add a govt top up of 50 percent

green=obscene/its been highjacked years ago [heck i know people died]
the basic isea is keep[ pushing the lie

3 percent=network building[ie 4 billion for ya mate to build a solsr farm selling power at ten times the price and your shared income is guaranteed/and if the power demand keeps falling it will be nearer to 40 percent[already they admit 29]

wake up you lobbiets
one more time/only this time know your selling lies

this clever thing was when someone tried to get too clever
clever circulated a memo/and some one maaged to issue another [with clever mob thinking it their memo

but at the last moment that monetarists secertary found it

he and clive shall go far
and what did abc want to talk about
3 million/payments left in a chinese fund

anyhow im sick of lying scum/the spin is the sin
[how come no rbuttal?/come-on ant brain;explain

come on off ya chair warm air
come enter the lair..why so many lies?
Posted by one under god, Friday, 11 July 2014 12:00:00 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
On 6 July warmair, you stated:“The bottom line is the good astronaut appears to be unaware of these facts.”

What you have raised, should it constitute fact, is not relevant to his statement. The issue is the dishonesty of the AGW assertion.

Cunningham says this about the letter to NASA which he and his group signed as ex-NASA personnel:
“We developed a letter to NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden and obtained signatures from seven Apollo astronauts, several former Headquarters managers and Center directors, and 40 former management-level technical specialists. We asked that he restrain NASA from including unproven claims in public releases and on websites. Statements by NASA that man-made carbon dioxide was having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. It is clear that the science is NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is inconsistent with NASA’s history of conducting an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements. They should be emphasizing to the media that human- caused global warming is a hypothesis, not a scientific fact.
And the second letter?
Well, NASA Chief Scientist, Dr. Waleed Abdalati, testified at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing that the sea level was projected to rise between 0.2 meters and 2 meters within the next 87 years. This was based upon the warmest temperature scenarios, derived of course, from highly theoretical computer models.
A group of NASA retirees responded with another letter charging that NASA in general, and GISS in particular, has failed to objectively assess all available data on climate change, while relying too heavily upon complex climate models that have not succeeded in predicting climate. The letter specifically asked that GISS, then headed by James Hansen, not incorporate unproven remarks in public releases and websites.
Thankfully, James Hansen has since resigned. He was an embarrassment and disgrace to the agency.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/08/06/a-conversation-with-apollo-astronaut-walter-cunningham-about-a-vital-need-to-restore-climate-science-integrity/
You really should make an attempt to be relevant, warmair.
Posted by Leo Lane, Saturday, 12 July 2014 2:37:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Leo,

On sea-level rise, I'm a bit concerned about that SBS advert, in which waves are seen slopping over mangroves - horrors ! obvious sea-level rise !

Well, not really - waves would slop over mangroves every day around the world even if the sea-level was falling, probably right at this moment. A really lazy, scare-mongering advert. SBD can do better.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Saturday, 12 July 2014 3:08:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well regardless of what your good astronaut believes this is what NASA says:-

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

It is sad really that, what has been well understood since before the the Wright brothers first flight in an aircraft, is being disputed by anyone.
Posted by warmair, Saturday, 12 July 2014 9:36:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks, warmair, for drawing our attention to the fact that although the climate fraud Hansen, has retired, NASA continues to lie about AGW. Apparently, Hansen has been replaced by Gavin Schmidt, part of the fraud-backing infestation centred on Realclimate, the Michael Mann site.
Despite the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere, and its failure to cause warming for nearly 18 years, you do not want the “science” questioned, because it is so old, even though it is obviously wrong. It is vital to the fraud-backer faith, to pretend that they have science to back their baseless assertions.
Posted by Leo Lane, Sunday, 13 July 2014 2:35:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Frankly Leo I have no idea why you are so determined to deny climate change. Its not just NASA that thinks climate change is happening it is every scientific body from every country bar one. On top of that most of the worlds largest companies agree as well.

http://www.bhpbilliton.com/home/society/ourperspective/Pages/Climate-Change.aspx

http://www.riotinto.com/documents/ReportsPublications/corpPub_ClimatePosition.pdf

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/may/08/lloyds-insurer-account-climate-change-extreme-weather-losses

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/05/20/some-companies-adjusting-stronger-storms-and-severe-weather/wgsC3tV105MOdAQIU7J0YI/story.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/01/22/climate-change-is-here-how-companies-are-preparing-for-it/

http://www.dow.com/sustainability/goals/climate.ht
Posted by warmair, Sunday, 13 July 2014 8:36:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. 26
  9. Page 27
  10. 28
  11. 29
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy