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 > Damage control - a greater problem than climate change > Comments

Damage control - a greater problem than climate change : Comments

By Valerie Yule, published 14/5/2009

Climate change has become a happy hunting ground to divert us from a greater problem - damage control.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. Page 6
  8. All
What a right royal nutter. Pity it doesn't get more publicity; AGW could just evaporate as the duped and plain gullible try dealing with their inevitable shock at protag's green-frothing madness.

OK. So oceans only emit CO2 if that CO2 has come originally “from elsewhere particularly from the burning of fossil fuels”? That cancels out the biological integrity of all marine life for a start; from plankton to sperm whales, coral to seaweed. Let's forget too about the WATER - ALL NO PROCESS OF EXPIRATION – zip!

Then there's Carl Wunsch's career as oceanographer. Out you go Carl, forget about modelling the fluctuations of oceanic CO2 emissions, the largest source on earth: protag just gave you a simple geographic calendar, 55 and 70 years respectively, and none from within the ocean itself! Cloud cuckoo land.

Then there's the dark, “investigative” stuff of “big oil” conspiracy. Tim Patterson has worked in an institute that had got some small funding traced to Exxon! Egads! Practically every university and academic institute in North America has had some small donation from Exxon; it's one way liberalist economies keep education systems going, along with giving tax breaks to corporate friends.

By protag's febrile nuttery, “big oil” must somehow be involved in a conspiracy against the financiers of IPCC, and “heroic” types like hedge fund pig Fat Al Gore. Onlookers: do check protag's links: they're of very similar "research" quality to the vast body of "investigation" into such nonsense as Roswell aliens. That's scary, because it demonstrates how the laity can become actually politicized on this issue by deception.

So back to base (again), with facts:
1) “The ocean emits CO2”,
2) The ocean is the biggest producer of CO2”, and (for emphasis, forgive the tautologies)
3) “Anthropogenic CO2 emissions are miniscule compared to that emitted by the ocean”.
Posted by mil-observer, Sunday, 24 May 2009 2:12:53 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
“What a right royal nutter. Pity it doesn't get more publicity; AGW could just evaporate as the duped and plain gullible try dealing with their inevitable shock at protag's green-frothing madness.”

http://www.ccas.ru/tarko/ocean_e.htm

Now steady on mil-o. We certainly don’t want you hyperventilating on OLO just because your hate-based faith system gets you in a tizz and you resort to cud spitting....whoops……oooh.....ah.....nah....no worries on-liners, I’ve got meself another hanky.

Carl Wunsch you say mil-o? Indeed a distinguished scientist who was the victim of Martin Durkin (et al), the producer of the pseudo-documentary, The Great Global Swindle, in which Durkin fraudulently misrepresented this fine scientist and others who have researched global climate. But of course Durkin and the other oily megalomaniacs are the charlatans you support but like you, are looking pretty damn stoopid!

Professor Wunsch remarked in his letter to Channel 4 in Britain:

“Never before, however, have I had an experience like this one. My appearance in the "Global Warming Swindle" is deeply embarrasing, and my professional reputation has been damaged. I was duped---an uncomfortable position in which to be.

“At a minimum, I ask that the film should never be seen again publicly with my participation included. Channel 4 surely owes an apology to its viewers....... I will be taking advice as to whether I should proceed to make some more formal protest.”

Professor Wunsch said that the use of his remarks in this way came close to fraud.

And in the past, two eminent British scientists who questioned the accuracy of a Channel 4 programme that claimed global warming was an unfounded conspiracy theory have received an expletive-filled tirade from the programme maker.

In an e-mail exchange leaked to the Times (UK), Martin Durkin, responded to the concerns of Dr Armand Leroi, from Imperial College, and Simon Singh, the respected scientific author, by telling them to “go and f** yourself” and “you’re a big daft cock.”

So what wildly manufactured abusive response can we expect from you this time mil-o, in providing political fodder for the rest of we punters whom you regard as illiterate dimwits?
Posted by Protagoras, Sunday, 24 May 2009 11:43:25 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
Here it is again, untouched and unsullied facts exposing the fraudulent protag:

1) “The ocean emits CO2”,
2) The ocean is the biggest producer of CO2”, and (for emphasis, forgive the tautologies)
3) “Anthropogenic CO2 emissions are miniscule compared to that emitted by the ocean”.

Nothing abusive there, except of course to the self-abusive protag.

Good to see reference to the spat over TGGWS though; sad that no formal legal action went ahead, kept as it was in the realm of publicity.
Posted by mil-observer, Monday, 25 May 2009 12:06:07 AM
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
Protagoras, perhaps if you cared to consult the FAO statistics for global forest cover?

It might also be pertinent to note that Worldwatch Institute referred to FAO's State of the World's Forests 1997 to claim that Canada was losing 200,000ha of forest per year - when that source actually showed almost the exact opposite.

Maybe poor old Lester was just reading the graph upside-down ...

Divergence, I rather suspect that your beloved publications have bought into the hysteria a little too much, and risk embarassing themselves with such tabloid alarmism as claiming that we are consiging humanity to the dustbin of history.

Witness, for example, their strident and bullying reaction to Bjorn Lomborg.

And actually, the more I read of the science, the less am I convinced by the shrieking hysteria of the alarmists. I used to be a card-carrying believer - I'm embarassed to admit that I even have a copy of "An inconvenient truth" - until I began to read more on the subject - not to mention become increasingly unnerved by the antics of the Climate Change alarmists.
Posted by Clownfish, Wednesday, 27 May 2009 9:57:43 AM
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. 4
  6. 5
  7. Page 6
  8. All

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