The Great Global Warming Swindle

[Aaron]

@Adam

AC,

You have been removed for calling people mentally retarded, etc... Please
don't sign up for any more accounts.

[Aaron]

for the record

he asked you to kindly please start a new thread and you should
respect his wishes. If not, your posts will be deleted and you'll be
removed.

Please do cry the old "censorship" claim because you're given an
opportunity to voice anything you want in your own thread and I'm sure
you will have some people posting references in support of what you
believe as they're certainly encouraged to do. So you can compile
a thread with references that support your viewpoint. You are not
engaging in respectful debate here, you are simply argumentative and
insulting. You're not respecting the forum posting rules and have not done
so through just about every thread you post in.

Banning me from this forum, is just censoring me, nothing else.
Why would you ban someone who starts threads, that many people post on? This just makes no sense and your actions are obviously personal in nature.

Just for the record...

Someone starting a thread wouldn't just be banned - and this thread was
started a long time ago before you came here calling people names.
Manipulating the situation to make it look like you actually started this
thread is obvious for what it is.

Personally, I was completely for you starting a thread specifically to
support your views and was completely for others posting things in support
of your view. It isn't about who is right or wrong. I'm here to learn as much
as anyone else but certain things simply won't be tolerated such as the
means of communication to others that you have demonstrated.

Bottom line is, nobody has ever been censored from this forum and nobody
ever will be. There are countless opposing views in the this forum that are
contrary to my own views and they are QUITE WELCOME as they are posted
without name calling and are done with respect to all members.

[Aaron]

@Adam

Adam,

You are simply proving yourself you have absolutely no respect for the
moderator's decision. I am a moderator and have removed you for
disrespect and name-calling. Your triple signup after being removed is
completely telling of the content of your character.

[ashtweth]

His photos and links have nothingness or look like nothing we have have observed, this PRICK, is really starting to annoy me cause he is taking up our time

Ash

[ashtweth]

AC,

You have been removed for calling people mentally retarded, etc... Please
don't sign up for any more accounts.

Aaron thanks for that, i owe you a beer. HOLD ME TO IT PLEASE.
thanks Bro, this guy pushed ALL our buttons

Ash

[Karl]

This may have been posted before if so sorry
Q&As February this year, from BBC to Phil Jones

BBC, B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Jones, Yes (followed by waffle, but the important part is he agrees)

BBC News - Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

looks like there's a shill about fella's, I wouldn't waste my time if I was you

[Aaron]

Dr. Phil Jones admits no statistically significant global warming

Very interesting:

Q&A: Professor Phil Jones


Phil Jones is director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which has been at the centre of the row over hacked e-mails.

The BBC's environment analyst Roger Harrabin put questions to Professor Jones, including several gathered from climate sceptics. The questions were put to Professor Jones with the co-operation of UEA's press office.


---------


Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.



---------


So Dr. Jones admits YES, there has been NO statistically significant
global warming. And he says that achieving statistical significance in

SCIENTIFIC TERMS is much more likely for longer periods, and must less

likely for shorter periods.


"but just only" is saying CLOSE, which "only counts in horseshoes and

hand grenades". In this case, it is or it isn't.


Of course I don't want to dismiss early warning signs but having
a holistic view of the matter I think is necessary and that view from
my perspective shows that there are so many variables to consider and
man made co2 is the least of them. Decomposing biomass all around the

world including other sources of co2 completely dwarfs what we're

contributing.


So, scientifically speaking, according to him, it is NOT scientific to state
there is global warming. This is his own admitted scientific opinion as one
of the leading awg co2 promoters!



And saying "much more likely" for longer periods. That is the same thing
as saying, "I only personally believe there will be global warming according
to science if we analyze it after a much longer period of time."


Personally, I believe there are more advanced life forms than humans, but Dr. Jones
is saying the same thing as if I said, "In time, I think there will be full
disclosure on aliens and we will finally know that aliens might exist." But
that is NOT to be taken as a scientific fact - it is just a personal opinion
and speculation and in his case, past trends are no indication of future
results as everyone that has lost money in the stock market knows well!


We just have to see what will happen. It is such a complex system.

Perhaps some time in the future we will see AGW from our own co2

have an impact if there are 15 billion people on the planet possibly but
by then and hopefully, we will choose to manage our own growth by
choice and not by some crazy globalist means, we will all have free energy
that doesn't contribute any pollution to the world. Of course we could
have that now and that is one of the purposes of this forum.

[Joit]

I would like to see all this Global-Warming-about-CO2 Enthusiasts
put all her Energy and Efforts into research from supressed Energiesources,
like HHO Motors, where some Hobbyist allready did proove,
that it works for a standalone System, like "Tag Anton-cell",
or some US Tinkerer, what run a Car allready on HHO Gas without any other Help,
against the Public Mainstream Opinion, that 'it dont works'.
With that we may would have a lot lesser Problems
with Pollutions as now. But i think, this would be the hard way,
and most Peoples prefer to go allways the soft Way.

I dont know, why i allways have the Feeling,
that after a while allways someone will come,
to figure out, how far the knowledge against the CO2 Scam is.

For my Part i still Love my daily Portion of CO2, because it is LIFE.

[Peter Lindemann]

Fairness

His photos and links have nothingness or look like nothing we have have observed, this PRICK, is really starting to annoy me cause he is taking up our time

Ash

Ash,

You know we love you, BUT, since Ozy was banned for "name-calling" you may consider toning down your own activity in this regards so Aaron doesn't have to BAN YOU just to be fair to Ozy.

Peter

[jibbguy]

It is interesting to note, that some of the same folks who will agree that causality exists between increased chemical smoke pollution beginning over 120 years ago and the dramatic rise in Cancer...

... will deny essentially the same cause/effect regarding man-made "climate change" ; specifically the receding of the North and South American and European glaciers (which is frankly absurd to deny the receding took place for whatever reason, as there are old photographs showing these glaciers for over 150 years now).

There is clear evidence of glacier loss in Greenland ("annular snowfall" is not the same thing, "snow" is about 1/10 the density of old ice), and there is irrefutable shrinking of the Polar Ice Cap, as well as the melting of tundra in North America, and even more dramatically, Siberia. These things "exist"... whether they are inconvenient or not for the "climategate" argument.

The fact is, that fossil fuel use is a Cancer to the Earth, as well as to Human Beings. And working to help the oil cartels remain in business indefinitely, when WE HERE know that we don't need to, is not an efficient or productive use of our talents, imo.

[Jbignes5]

A new thought.

Maybe this effect we are seeing is due to the speed of the universe and of our path through that universe. It is plainly accepted that the universe is increasing in speed right? Well think of it as this...

"Since the permanent magnet field is constant, the terminal voltage varies directly with the speed of the generator." This was taken from the wiki about alternators.

If we understand that concept then we can explain all the increased activity in all of our universe. We are gaining in potential as we speed up in the universe. This gain is subtle and has to be measured with the increase in speed of the whole universe and tempered with what we are doing as a species to our environment.

Whatever you blame it on, it is because of nothing more then the natural process of our universe gaining in speed. Of course what we are doing to our own environment is not helping in the least bit.

[alexstep2009]

Hi I've been reading this thread about a year.
I just think if anybody considerering that Earth pole accelerating shift may be responsible for climate change?

NASA - Earth's Inconstant Magnetic Field


Best regards,

alexstep2009

[RedRightHand]

My comment was regarding Aaron's last post.
I understand your the moderator, so please don't ban me like Ozy, but I thought I should point this out to you.

I read the entire article from the BBC on Dr Phil Jones, hoping to find some evidence that this Climate Change thing is a hoax. But he clearly thinks Climate Change is real.
I will just clarify where I think you might of misunderstood what he was saying:

You have taken one sentence here and blown it out of proportion.

Dr Phil states:
Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?
"Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods."

1. He is only talking about 1995-2009, he clearly states that if you look at any other time period there is a significant amount of warming going on.
2. We are also debating the difference between 0.012 and 0.015 here, I think this is very insignificant.
3. When Dr Phil talks about longer periods, he is talking about looking at a bigger time frame then 13 years. Not into the future as you have speculated.
Basically, he is saying you can take some short time periods and see a cooling trend - but if you look at the big picture you always see a warming trend.
4. You appear to be making this man out to be a fool, when he is obviously not. Comparing his work to Aliens and such.
5. You speculate his work is only his opinion when he clearly shows his data for his 5 years of research.
6. But most of all you say he doesn't believe in Climate Change, which is absurd, he spends 1000's of words in this article very carefully explaining his view that Climate Change is real.


I do believe you have mis-represented Dr Phils findings in your post.
We should try to find evidence without having to misrepresenting people and taking their words out of context.


Also, Something to think about:
"Decomposing biomass all around the world including other sources of co2 completely dwarfs what we're
contributing."
How can you say that part of the biomass decomposing isn't from human impact?
I would say a lot of the decomposing biomass around the world is directly caused by human impact!


Just my 2 cents...

Once again, please don't ban me, I just think you may of misunderstood what Dr Phil Jones was saying.


Yours Sincerely,

Red

[ashtweth]

Ash,

You know we love you, BUT, since Ozy was banned for "name-calling" you may consider toning down your own activity in this regards so Aaron doesn't have to BAN YOU just to be fair to Ozy.

Peter

Doh Whoops sorry about that Peter your right, i should get my behind beat for that! sorry guys, no excuse should of gone for a walk Will do sorry again about that guys.

Looks like the bogus "Climate Science" Consensus is going to cost a few people more than what Gore's goals were. From insurance companies trying to charge more to now Glodman Sachs who it looks like are in bed with

Chicago Climate Exchange CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE are trying to prop up their Carbon futures program for Australia, even tho the price of carbon has collapsed. I bet all sorts of other carbon taxes are on the way, it would be interesting if some one took the issue to court and invited in all the REAL climate scientist as witnesses or for testimony to fight the tax with real climate science. I bet these carbon taxes are going to get worse before the truth finally comes out.

Looks like it pretty easy to accomplish this task, rent out a few climate "expert" bodies and let them predict natural disasters based on their "hypothesis" that human CO2 causes global warming, which then will most certainly cause more disasters. These are the scientific climate expert minds at work, on the behalf of insurance companies, Goldman and others seeking greater profits.

Ash

[Jbignes5]

I agree..

Doh Whoops sorry about that Peter your right, i should get my behind beat for that! sorry guys, no excuse should of gone for a walk Will do sorry again about that guys.

Looks like the bogus "Climate Science" Consensus is going to cost a few people more than what Gore's goals were. From insurance companies trying to charge more to now Glodman Sachs who it looks like are in bed with

Chicago Climate Exchange CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE are trying to prop up their Carbon futures program for Australia, even tho the price of carbon has collapsed. I bet all sorts of other carbon taxes are on the way, it would be interesting if some one took the issue to court and invited in all the REAL climate scientist as witnesses or for testimony to fight the tax with real climate science. I bet these carbon taxes are going to get worse before the truth finally comes out.

Looks like it pretty easy to accomplish this task, rent out a few climate "expert" bodies and let them predict natural disasters based on their "hypothesis" that human CO2 causes global warming, which then will most certainly cause more disasters. These are the scientific climate expert minds at work, on the behalf of insurance companies, Goldman and others seeking greater profits.

Ash

This tax is utter bull... We all know it. The problem is that where there is a buck to be made these days you will find the profiteers. It happens everywhere. Even on this forum..