Yeah, it's interesting how MHAZE has dropped off here as well. Probably in another thread. What happened to his 'dozens' of papers proving a quarter of the last 10,000 years were hotter than today?

(Crickets chirping.)

To Max Green.

All I can account for is based on what I've seen. I don't have the motivation to seek out what's real and what's sensationalized in the media. If it's in a news story
I have to take that at face value, whether it's about an ongoing list of never ending murder and crime throughout the world, or whether it's about climate change.

So when a detective says one thing in a news story and it isn't corrected later as being misrepresented then I have to take it at face value. The same is true with climate scientists. What's said every so often in the media concerning global warming is on the narrative that the end is near. Has been that way for some time. I remember two other times in my life where there was a warning issued that we have 10 years or so to fix the planet before it's too late and it's a mad max kind of world. In both of those cases nothing happened to the sensationalized stories,mind yet recently we've been handed another one saying we have 12 more years before it's too late.

Regardless if it's the scientists, or the media that is reporting on it, the rule of thumb I've developed is that it is unreliable. At that point I don't care who ' so at fault at the unreliability. The news agencies or the scientists. It's just acknowledged that it's not reliable and move on.

I hope you are not insulted by that stance or want me to prove it to you. And that you can understand it even if you are involved in climate science studies through your life.

(Continued)

There was a spoof report I read a little while ago by Bee Babylon (a spoof news site for satire) that made me laugh but hits home the aspect I see in the Climate change stories. The spoof news story reported that scientists said we have twelve years before we have to make up another date to be concerned about so the world should get their act together.

That's not an actual quote from a real scientist, but it does sum up my observations on climate science time deadlines. Including the most recent one.

It has been a very long thread ,and in truth neither side has moved an inch toward the other side
Yet for me it has provided a very real truth
Start with this, both sides are convinced the other is wrong, even a victim of fraud
Now for that truth, not just in this subject but just about every thing
One side must be wrong, one side must be right
Yet the verbal battle continues
It is my honest view, we are being used, that powers we can not pinpoint are now using the *divide and conquer* thing to? hide the truth, confuse us, keep us away from the very true reasons they do not want us to understand the truth
For me that truth, in this matter, is man made climate change is real
But another truth exists, we are being used by some force that one day may let us know in very unfortunate ways, it, not us, is incharge

Hi Max Green,

I'm glad Bazz admitted the reasoning behind AGW denialism. A matter of simple human nature: greed and self-interest. We just needed for one of them to actually come out into the open and admit it for the whole world to see.

They're not much different to the Holocaust denialists who were motivated by an attempt to establish white suprematism.The Holocaust denialists try to do distort the historical record in the same way AGW denialists try to distort science.

Shame on you Loudmouth! Shame on you Hasbeen! Shame on you ttbn! Shame on you individual! Shame on you Bazz! Shame on you mhaze! How do you look your grandchildren in the eyes and tell them everything is okay as long as you have a big bank balance. Shame on all of you denialists for letting greed and self-interest destroy our planet.

Max,

It's not a few cats and dogs but thousands.
OK, if your few minutes of fun is at the cost of avoidable animal cruelty, then enjoy it.

One imagines though that the cancellation of the New Years fireworks would be world news and have a much greater impact than shutting down a coal-fired power station or two.