Satellite data proves Earth has not been warming the past 18 years - it's stable

Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Demographics
Residential demographics affect perceptions of global warming. In China, 77% of those who live in urban areas are aware of global warming compared to 52% in rural areas. This trends is mirrored in India with 49% to 29% awareness, respectively.

Of those countries where at least half the population are aware of global warming, those with the greatest proportion believing that global warming is due to human activities spend more on energy.

In Europe, individuals under fifty-five are more likely to perceive both "poverty, lack of food and drinking water" and climate change as a serious threat than individuals over fifty-five. Male individuals are more likely to perceive climate change as a threat than female individuals. Managers, white collar workers, and students are more likely to perceive climate change as a greater threat than house persons and retired individuals.

Political identification
In the United States, support for environmental protection was relatively non-partisan in the past. Republican Theodore Roosevelt established national parks whereas Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt established the Soil Conservation Service. This non-partisanship began to erode during the 1980s when the Reagan administration described environmental protection as an economic burden. Views over global warming began to seriously diverge between Democrats and Republicans during the negotiations that led up to the creation of the Kyoto Protocol in 1998. In a 2008 Gallup poll of the American public, 76% of Democrats and only 41% of Republicans said that they believed global warming was already happening. The gap between the opinions of the political elites, such as members of Congress, tends to be even more polarized.

In Europe, opinion is not strongly divided among left and right parties. Although European political parties on the left, and Green parties, strongly support measures to address climate change, conservative European political parties maintain similar sentiments, most notably in Western and Northern Europe. For example, France's center-right President Chirac pushed key environmental and climate change policies in France in 2005–2007, and conservative German administrations (under the Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union) in the past two decades have supported European Union climate change initiatives. In the period after former President Bush announced that the United States was leaving the Kyoto Treaty, European media and newspapers on both the left and right criticized the move. The conservative Spanish La Razón, the Irish Times, Irish Independent, the Danish Berlingske Tidende, and the Greek Kathimerini all condemned the Bush administration's decision along with left-leaning newspapers.

In Norway, a 2013 poll conducted by TNS Gallup found that 92% of those who vote for the Socialist Left Party and 89% of those who vote for the Liberal Party believe that global warming is caused by humans, while the percentage who held this belief is 60% among voters for the Conservative Party and 41% among voters for the Progress Party.

The shared sentiments between the political left and right on climate change further illustrate the divide in perception between the United States and Europe on climate change. As an example, conservative German Prime Ministers Helmut Kohl and Angela Merkel have differed with other parties in Germany only on "how to meet emissions reduction targets, not whether or not to establish or fulfill them."

Ideology
In the United States, ideology is an effective predictor of party identification, where conservatives are more prevalent among Republicans, and moderates and liberals among independents and Democrats. A shift in ideology is often associated with in a shift in political views. For example, when the number of conservatives rose from 2008 to 2009, the number of individuals who felt that global warming was being exaggerated in the media also rose.
Click to expand...
unsourced copy/paste about an OPINION POLL for fuck's sake.

you clowns are desperate now.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
MuyLocoNC said:
I continue to embrace my WELL-KNOWN position that the claim that man is a significant cause of any change in the climate is a complete fabrication.
Click to expand...
so you're claiming that not only do 34 national academies have it all wrong, but they KNOW they have it all wrong and continue the lie anyway?

:lol:

pardon my greek, but you are one stupid motherfucking idiot. even kynes would agree with that.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
unsourced copy/paste about an OPINION POLL for fuck's sake.

you clowns are desperate now.
Click to expand...
desperate is calling roy spencer a "well respected scientist".

desperate is accusing 34 national academies of science of playing politics while your "well respected scientist" works for a political think tank that takes money from exxon-mobil.

desperate is accusing AGW proponents of "religion" while your "well respected scientist" is a creationist who is beholden to an evangelical pledge on AGW.

desperate is every tactic that you blockheads use, especially since we have seen them all before when you guys were doing the same thing with respect to the harmfulness of tobacco.
 
DonAlejandroVega

DonAlejandroVega

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
desperate is calling roy spencer a "well respected scientist".

desperate is accusing 34 national academies of science of playing politics while your "well respected scientist" works for a political think tank that takes money from exxon-mobil.

desperate is accusing AGW proponents of "religion" while your "well respected scientist" is a creationist who is beholden to an evangelical pledge on AGW.

desperate is every tactic that you blockheads use, especially since we have seen them all before when you guys were doing the same thing with respect to the harmfulness of tobacco.
Click to expand...
he thinks he's Churchill.......lol!
we'll fight them on the beaches......
we'll fight them in the streets.........

the Green Party awaits its new leader...........
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
so you're claiming that not only do 34 national academies have it all wrong, but they KNOW they have it all wrong and continue the lie anyway?

:lol:

pardon my greek, but you are one stupid motherfucking idiot. even kynes would agree with that.
Click to expand...
Really, I've read every post the good doctor has made on the subject and I think our opinions align rather well.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Demographics
Residential demographics affect perceptions of global warming. In China, 77% of those who live in urban areas are aware of global warming compared to 52% in rural areas. This trends is mirrored in India with 49% to 29% awareness, respectively.

Of those countries where at least half the population are aware of global warming, those with the greatest proportion believing that global warming is due to human activities spend more on energy.

In Europe, individuals under fifty-five are more likely to perceive both "poverty, lack of food and drinking water" and climate change as a serious threat than individuals over fifty-five. Male individuals are more likely to perceive climate change as a threat than female individuals. Managers, white collar workers, and students are more likely to perceive climate change as a greater threat than house persons and retired individuals.

Political identification
In the United States, support for environmental protection was relatively non-partisan in the past. Republican Theodore Roosevelt established national parks whereas Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt established the Soil Conservation Service. This non-partisanship began to erode during the 1980s when the Reagan administration described environmental protection as an economic burden. Views over global warming began to seriously diverge between Democrats and Republicans during the negotiations that led up to the creation of the Kyoto Protocol in 1998. In a 2008 Gallup poll of the American public, 76% of Democrats and only 41% of Republicans said that they believed global warming was already happening. The gap between the opinions of the political elites, such as members of Congress, tends to be even more polarized.

In Europe, opinion is not strongly divided among left and right parties. Although European political parties on the left, and Green parties, strongly support measures to address climate change, conservative European political parties maintain similar sentiments, most notably in Western and Northern Europe. For example, France's center-right President Chirac pushed key environmental and climate change policies in France in 2005–2007, and conservative German administrations (under the Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union) in the past two decades have supported European Union climate change initiatives. In the period after former President Bush announced that the United States was leaving the Kyoto Treaty, European media and newspapers on both the left and right criticized the move. The conservative Spanish La Razón, the Irish Times, Irish Independent, the Danish Berlingske Tidende, and the Greek Kathimerini all condemned the Bush administration's decision along with left-leaning newspapers.

In Norway, a 2013 poll conducted by TNS Gallup found that 92% of those who vote for the Socialist Left Party and 89% of those who vote for the Liberal Party believe that global warming is caused by humans, while the percentage who held this belief is 60% among voters for the Conservative Party and 41% among voters for the Progress Party.

The shared sentiments between the political left and right on climate change further illustrate the divide in perception between the United States and Europe on climate change. As an example, conservative German Prime Ministers Helmut Kohl and Angela Merkel have differed with other parties in Germany only on "how to meet emissions reduction targets, not whether or not to establish or fulfill them."

Ideology
In the United States, ideology is an effective predictor of party identification, where conservatives are more prevalent among Republicans, and moderates and liberals among independents and Democrats. A shift in ideology is often associated with in a shift in political views. For example, when the number of conservatives rose from 2008 to 2009, the number of individuals who felt that global warming was being exaggerated in the media also rose.
Click to expand...
how about some Peer Reviewed Science, to Science away your opinion poll of Non-Scientists:

geo-scientists and engineers who express the strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause: 36%

geo-scientists and engineers who believe that changes to the climate are natural, normal cycles of the earth: 24%

geo-scientists and engineers who consider the "'real' cause of climate change" to be "unknown" and acknowledge that "nature is forever changing and uncontrollable.": 10%

Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change
Lianne M. Lefsrud &[URL='http://oss.sagepub.com/search?author1=Renate+E.+Meyer&sortspec=date&submit=Submit'] Renate E. Meyer 2012[/URL]
~http://oss.sagepub.com/content/33/11/1477.full

ohh my. where did your "97%" go?

 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
desperate is calling roy spencer a "well respected scientist".

desperate is accusing 34 national academies of science of playing politics while your "well respected scientist" works for a political think tank that takes money from exxon-mobil.

desperate is accusing AGW proponents of "religion" while your "well respected scientist" is a creationist who is beholden to an evangelical pledge on AGW.

desperate is every tactic that you blockheads use, especially since we have seen them all before when you guys were doing the same thing with respect to the harmfulness of tobacco.
Click to expand...
Dr Roy Spencer is respected enough for NOAA and NASA, but not enough for you...

have you shared your devastatingly powerful opinions with those organizations yet?

i am certain all his work will be discarded and every project he ever worked on will be binned, based on your impeachment of his credibility...
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
MuyLocoNC said:
Really, I've read every post the good doctor has made on the subject and I think our opinions align rather well.
Click to expand...
he has never called it a "hoax" or a "lie" at all.

he actually acknowledges that human activities do contribute to the warming we are seeing.

you are deluded beyond words if you think you guys see eye to eye on this.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
Dr Roy Spencer is respected enough for NOAA and NASA, but not enough for you...
Click to expand...
so now you're saying that the government only ever hires perfectly competent employees?

:lol:

never knew that about you.

anyhoo, care to discuss his employment with a political front group that is funded by exxon-mobil? yes? no? maybe his evangelical declarations on AGW or belief in creationism?

thought not.
 
Nutes and Nugs

Nutes and Nugs

Well-Known Member
What have they done to the earth?
What have they done to our fair sister?
Ravaged and plundered and ripped her and bit her
Stuck her with knives in the side of the dawn
And tied her with fences and dragged her down

I hear a very gentle sound
With your ear down to the ground
We want the world and we want it...
We want the world and we want it...

 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
no, the question remains because despite their recent backpedalling, the IPCC continues to base their "How Much" assertions on guesswork and deliberately falsified data.
Click to expand...
There has been no "recent backpedalling"; the IPCC has been consistent in all 5 reports

-you deny it

"continues to base their "how much" assertions on guesswork and deliberately falsified data."

Talking point that's been demonstrably disproven repeatedly

-you deny it

Dr Kynes said:
robert welch (the founding member of the john birch society) DIED in 1958, long before the global warming "crisis" was ever dreamed up.
i cited a journalist who stumbled onto the real data, and was threatened with lolsuits if he revealed it. i cited NOTHING from welch, so that would be a LIE

and yet you did make that shit up...
Click to expand...
Origins [John Birch Society]

The society was established in Indianapolis, Indiana, on December 9, 1958, by a group of 12 led by Robert Welch, Jr., a retired candy manufacturer from Belmont, Massachusetts. Welch named the new organization after John Birch, an American Baptist missionary and United States military intelligence officer who had been shot by communist forces in China in August 1945, shortly after the conclusion of World War II. Welch claimed that Birch was an unknown but dedicated anti-communist, and the first American casualty of the Cold War.

Fred Koch, founder of Koch Industries, was one of the founding members. Robert Waring Stoddard, President of Wyman-Gordon, a major industrial enterprise, was also among the founders. Another was Revilo P. Oliver, a University of Illinois professor who later severed his relationship with the society and helped found the National Alliance. A transcript of Welch's two-day presentation at the founding meeting was published as The Blue Book of the John Birch Society, and became a cornerstone of its beliefs, with each new member receiving a copy. According to Welch, "both the U.S. and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers, and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order, managed by a 'one-world socialist government.'" Welch saw collectivism as the main threat to Western Civilization, and liberals as "secret communist traitors" who provided cover for the gradual process of collectivism, with the ultimate goal of replacing the nations of western civilization with a one-world socialist government. "There are many stages of welfarism, socialism, and collectivism in general," he wrote, "but Communism is the ultimate state of them all, and they all lead inevitably in that direction."

The society's activities include distribution of literature, pamphlets, magazines, videos and other educational material while sponsoring a Speaker's Bureau, which invites "speakers who are keenly aware of the motivations that drive political policy". One of the first public activities of the society was a "Get US Out!" (of membership in the UN) campaign, which claimed in 1959 that the "Real nature of [the] UN is to build a One World Government". In 1960, Welch advised JBS members to: "Join your local P.T.A. at the beginning of the school year, get your conservative friends to do likewise, and go to work to take it over." One Man's Opinion, a magazine launched by Welch in 1956, was renamed American Opinion, and became the society's official publication. The society publishes the biweekly publication The New American.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/18300-climategate-3-0-university-threatens-blogger-for-exposing-97-consensus-fraud



Dr Kynes said:
a million wrong answers based on a political agenda and smearing those scientists who offer a different opinion is still the WRONG answer.
Click to expand...
"smearing", "bullying", "intimidating".. all bullshit words that are meant to imply there's some debate about science because you can't argue the scientific facts. If you believe something that is bullshit, you get laughed out of academia, that's how it works. What's next, are you going to go to a gay pride parade and cry about heterosexual discrimination?

...wait, you probably would.. maybe that was a bad analogy..

Dr Kynes said:
smart enough to make you look like a fool, so what does that say about you?
Click to expand...
Says the guy who cites the John Birch Society to prove anthropogenic climate change is a hoax...

@ Buck, I'd say this one's almost as bad as Roy Spencer, add Robert Welch to that embarrassing list of "scientists" the climate change deniers proudly cite without shame
 
sheskunk

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
Still waiting for someone to tell me what this all means and what is going to be done about it. We keep hearing how it's too late to prevent, so now what?

Throw me a scenario.

In 100 years the Earth will be __________________________ .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top