Thanks Thanks:  0
LMAO LMAO:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Ignorant Ignorant:  0
Moron Moron:  0
Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 233

Thread: The Great Global Warming Swindle

  1. #126
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post


    The Father of the Weather Channel John Coleman exposes the mass fraud behind Climate-gate and "Man Made Global Warming" and how government grants are being used to manipulate scientific reports to justify the instant take over of the world by Environmental Fascists and Marxists.

    ..

    No America Warming so far this spring
    Posted on June 13, 2013 by Steve Milloy | Leave a comment

    Coolest spring since 1996 — 40 ppm CO2 ago.

    “The spring average temperature for the contiguous U.S. was 50.5°F, 0.5°F below the 20th century average, making it the 38th coolest spring on record and the coolest spring since 1996.”

    Read more at NOAA.
    So you say that this year was the coldest spring in 17 years. Hmmm

    Well that just disproves everything.

    Ah we'll best just ignore the fact that ladst year was the hottest spring since America kept records
    2012: Hottest Spring on Record

    Because the hottest spring in over 200 years is meaningless compared to a cool spring this year.

  2. #127
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Due to family issues, the Stanley Cup and a very bad computer virus I've been away. No one scared me off and some interesting things have come up in the last 10 days or so.

    First off there is this article: Interview: Hans von Storch on Problems with Climate Change Models - SPIEGEL ONLINE

    Hans von Storch, 63, is director of the Institute for Coastal Research at the Helmholtz Center Geesthacht for Materials and Coastal Research, near Hamburg. A mathematician and meteorologist, he ranks among the world's leading climate experts. At the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, he had an important role in analyzing the computer models used to simulate future climate changes.

    Here are some of the jucier tidbits:
    In regarrd to flooding (and the crazy twisted logic you use regarding flood insurance) he said; "But people are now talking much more about the likely causes of flooding, such as land being paved over or the disappearance of natural flood zones -- and that's a good thing."

    Or this question and answer:
    SPIEGEL: Yet it was climate researchers, with their apocalyptic warnings, who gave people these ideas in the first place.
    Storch: Unfortunately, some scientists behave like preachers, delivering sermons to people. What this approach ignores is the fact that there are many threats in our world that must be weighed against one another.

    Regarding that "all climate scientists agree:
    "Climate research is made up of far too many different voices for that. Personally, though, I don't believe the chancellor has delved deeply into the subject. If she had, she would know that there are other perspectives besides those held by her environmental policy administrators."

    And here is a comment where we can put to rest the argument over if the warming has basically stopped int eh last 15 years:
    SPIEGEL: Just since the turn of the millennium, humanity has emitted another 400 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, yet temperatures haven't risen in nearly 15 years. What can explain this?

    Storch: So far, no one has been able to provide a compelling answer to why climate change seems to be taking a break. We're facing a puzzle. Recent CO2 emissions have actually risen even more steeply than we feared. As a result, according to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius (0.45 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 10 years. That hasn't happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) -- a value very close to zero. This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.

    Now here is the real meat concerning the models:
    SPIEGEL: Do the computer models with which physicists simulate the future climate ever show the sort of long standstill in temperature change that we're observing right now?

    Storch: Yes, but only extremely rarely. At my institute, we analyzed how often such a 15-year stagnation in global warming occurred in the simulations. The answer was: In under 2 percent of all the times we ran the simulation. In other words, over 98 percent of forecasts show CO2 emissions as high as we have had in recent years leading to more of a temperature increase.

    SPIEGEL: How long will it still be possible to reconcile such a pause in global warming with established climate forecasts?

    Storch: If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models. A 20-year pause in global warming does not occur in a single modeled scenario. But even today, we are finding it very difficult to reconcile actual temperature trends with our expectations.

    I can go on and on but you need to read the article. He admits the models are wrong and that they need to be adjusted. He even says this VERY telling statement in regard the the foundational belief that humans caused the warming: "Of course, that evidence presupposed that we had correctly assessed the amount of natural climate fluctuation. Now that we have a new development, we may need to make adjustments."

    And to make matters even worse there was a huge article in the New Republic of all places. See here: [url=http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113533/global-warming-hiatus-where-did-heat-go[/url]

    First off more proof and admittance that warming has basically stopped over the last 15 years. Can we put that argument to bed now?

    Here is an interesting line fromt he article: "The phenomena that most clearly causes the Earth’s temperature to rise and fall are El Nino and La Nina." Yet we are supposed to believe that man made greenhouse gas is the major cause.

    I also loved this line for being so ironic: "Conveniently, the “hiatus” is said to begin in 1998, when a historic El Nino produced the warmest year of the twentieth century. That starting point amounts to cherry-picking."

    Same thing many of us have said about 1850 since that was the end of the Little Ice Age. Cherry-picking for everyone!

    After trying to create a few "theories" the article hits on what I've been saying for a very long time: "But other scientists think that the heat is missing because it never made into Earth's climate system. The idea that heat might not have made it relates to the concept of “forcing.”" The VALUE used in the models for the forcings were always just a guess and never proved by any experiment. But let's not stop there.

    "According to Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, lower levels of solar radiation account for 10 to 15 percent of the hiatus." Yet the very active sun leading up to 1998 could NEVER account for more then a couple of percentage increase in warmings. This sentence proves that solar radiation accounts for 10-15% which means that 95% figure the IPCC used for eyars is WRONG!

    There are other great tidbits like how parasol-reflecting particles account for the hiatus yet the IPCC completly dismissed the removal of these particles from the US and Europe in the 70' and 80's due to tough polution laws.

    Now for the BIG BIG paragraph in the article:
    "Nonetheless, the combination of imperfect data, overlapping explanations, and continued uncertainty mean that scientists cannot discount the possibility that they have overestimated the climate’s “sensitivity” to additional greenhouse gas emissions. For Held, the last 10 to 15 years “make it more plausible that the size of climate response to greenhouse gas increase is on the lower side of what models have been projecting over the last 10 or 20 years rather than over the high side.” Held is not alone."

    And to put to rest the silly and absurd notion that the science is settled or that there is a "consensus" we have:
    "In the end, the so-called scientific consensus on global warming doesn’t look like much like consensus when scientists are struggling to explain the intricacies of the earth’s climate system, or uttering the word “uncertainty” with striking regularity."

    I was going to get into a very long and detailed discussion on why the models were wrong. I don't have to now that in the last week these articles basically drive holes int he models that are so big you can fit a semi-truck in them. There were other articles but these came from "skeptic" sites so I decided to focus on the left leaning sites.

    Bottom line is as this hiatus continues over the next five years no one will be left to support the models and their predictions for the next 100 years. Let's continue with the science and hold off on the crazy doomsday talk.

  3. #128
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    Due to family issues, the Stanley Cup and a very bad computer virus I've been away. No one scared me off and some interesting things have come up in the last 10 days or so.
    What would be interesting to me is for you to satisfactorily explain why Big Energy is saying one thing and Big Insurance is saying something completely different. They are not even close in their conclusions. Take the studies from Big Energy and compare them with the studies from Big Insurance. Surely they both have access to the same quality of research and same quality of people. I can find an article claiming the world is ruled by lizard people.

    12.5-million Americans think lizard people rule the world, plus 19 other conspiracy theories
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...ticle10713868/
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  4. #129
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    What would be interesting to me is for you to satisfactorily explain why Big Energy is saying one thing and Big Insurance is saying something completely different. They are not even close in their conclusions.
    Really, honestly? Just because big energy and big insurance disagree that is supposed to mean something? As I said before companies work in their own self-interest. Of course you disputed this and I can't debate against illogical things.

    Was it a surprise that dems and repubs disagree? Or big tobacco and and big medicine?

    I noticed that you basically ignored where I found articles with "climate scientists" that call into dispute the models used.

    I come from a background programming these types of models and have done work in the fields of hydro, structural and thermal. What you fail to realize is that the whole issue is based on these computer models.

    Here is a simple example. In building a bridge, a computer model is created to test various forces to make sure it is structurally sound. One of these forces is plain old gravity. Now the value of this force is well known and validated by real life experiments.

    But in the climate models they take a forceing like the greenhouse gas effect. No one denies that it isn't a real forcing. But the question is in the whole Earth's climate what is the proper sensitivity and feedback values. There are no known real world experiments to substantiate the numbers used in the climate models. Actually, they pick a range and run numerous simulations using all the values in a range and then apply statistical smoothing to arrive at their output.

    But having looked at a few of the models over the years, myself and others have questioned why the positive forcings showed greater sensitivity then the negative forcings, and why were some negative forcing even left out. Was the politcal desires driving the results?

    And this brings us back to your question on why two institutions looking at the same data arrive at different results. One reason (and a huge one) is because it's to their benefit to do so. Politicians have staked their future and reputations on solving a problem. But what if all of a sudden it was discovered there is no problem? Some companies have bet millions and spent millions to foster an image. But what if that image is no longer important to consumers? Scientists require grant money to be employed but what if their field is no longer important?

    You have said you don't want to know the science. Fine, but then don't make up pseudo-sceince to replace it. You can not derive and answer as to if the values used in AGW models are accurate simply based on how the insurance industry perceives it to be. If that was the case then they proved God exists because so much is disallowed to "Acts of God".

  5. #130
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    You have said you don't want to know the science. Fine, but then don't make up pseudo-sceince to replace it. You can not derive and answer as to if the values used in AGW models are accurate simply based on how the insurance industry perceives it to be. If that was the case then they proved God exists because so much is disallowed to "Acts of God".
    First of all Mongo, for the bold and underlined if you are going to quote me then quote me IN FULL and IN CONTEXT. As for the second, I know you are the smartest guy in this or any other room, and I am but a hayseed but can you explain what Pseudoscience I made up? Seems to me I rather astutely contrasted how two different industries with access to the same caliber of researcher and research have interpreted the data.

    You seem to be the one who is not up to the challenge of laying the data side by side and doing an analysis for a simpleton like me.



    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    Really, honestly? Just because big energy and big insurance disagree that is supposed to mean something? As I said before companies work in their own self-interest. Of course you disputed this and I can't debate against illogical things.
    Again Mongo, I said no such thing. So I am going to ask that you quote me in full and in context as even for someone as slow as I am, I find it extremely annoying that someone as brilliant and worldly as yourself can't even repeat what I said correctly. It is almost like you are having a conversation with someone else, making up things they said, and saying what you want to say anyway.

    Two very large industries Big Energy and Big Insurance with access to top notch talent and top notch research have two very different conclusions. Do you Mongo have access to research they do not? Have you conducted studies yourself? Unless you can explain in a side by side comparison why there is this huge difference and the methods you used to derive your conclusions then frankly I have heard it all before.
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  6. #131
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    First of all Mongo, for the bold and underlined if you are going to quote me then quote me IN FULL and IN CONTEXT. As for the second, I know you are the smartest guy in this or any other room, and I am but a hayseed but can you explain what Pseudoscience I made up?
    Pseudo-science is where you draw a conclusion based on the notion that because two companies disagree it therefore proves something.

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    Seems to me I rather astutely contrasted how two different industries with access to the same caliber of researcher and research have interpreted the data.

    You seem to be the one who is not up to the challenge of laying the data side by side and doing an analysis for a simpleton like me.

    Again Mongo, I said no such thing. So I am going to ask that you quote me in full and in context as even for someone as slow as I am, I find it extremely annoying that someone as brilliant and worldly as yourself can't even repeat what I said correctly. It is almost like you are having a conversation with someone else, making up things they said, and saying what you want to say anyway.

    Two very large industries Big Energy and Big Insurance with access to top notch talent and top notch research have two very different conclusions. Do you Mongo have access to research they do not? Have you conducted studies yourself? Unless you can explain in a side by side comparison why there is this huge difference and the methods you used to derive your conclusions then frankly I have heard it all before.
    What part of "companies and individuals reach different conclusion based on their self-interest" do you not comprehend?

    Or here is a simple example. Big Brokerage uses the stock market and data on it to push people to invest in the market. Using the exact same data Big Gold says that it is better to invest in Gold then stocks. Now do I really have to draw you a picture to explain why these two industries using th esame data can arrive at their conclusion that investing in their product is the right one?

  7. #132
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    19,835
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo
    What part of "companies and individuals reach different conclusion based on their self-interest" do you not comprehend?
    I can't speak for Ribshaw, but, I would guess it's the part where an anonymous internet poster dares to assume a company or an individual is incapable of coming to a conclusion based on anything but self interest.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  8. #133
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    Mongo, flood damage is the single largest financial risk of climate change to property insurers and they have said as much in their actions. The national flood insurance program is socialized, meaning property insurers largely refuse to underwrite the risks of flood damage. The taxpayers are now assuming almost all of the risk! Now adverse selection is one issue, but that is true with all insurance so they factor it in. Although, as an aside I do find your defense of Socialism sort of touching when juxtaposed with your previous comments about taxes being confiscated.
    And where did I ever say that I personally agree with how flood insurance is handleled. Now how is calling the kettle black? I just pointed out the reason why and how flood insurance is handeled. I never once said that I support it.

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    A primer on how flood insurance works. People buy essentially two policies, a homeowners policy and a flood policy.
    Gee thank you Mr. Wizard as I would never have known that.

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    A storm like Katrina hits and the insurance company says "flood damage", go see the taxpayer. They are at virtually no risk of loss to flooding, so you would think they would have nothing to say about climate change. One would guess that they have fired all their actuaries, climate people, turned on the news and realized it was all a big scam. Now they can rake in all the premiums they can from this HOAX. In fact Mongo, you alluded to them being complicit in the hoax in an effort to make more money by raising premiums. Unfortunately, in many cases they are saying the risks of climate change are real and too great for us to bear.
    You are my source and proved my point. Since the insurance companies primary goal is to make profits then getting the government and taxpayers to pay for losses resolves this issue. So blame climate change and push any losses onto the taxpayers. But you probably still can't see this as their motive.

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    But please, don't believe me, I have sourced 10 articles on the subject. So it would also be nice when you are giving us all more information on thinking about climate change if you could include a few studies funded not just by Big Energy, but Big Insurance as well.

    Allstate, for instance, has said that climate change has prompted it to cancel or not renew policies in many Gulf Coast states, with recent hurricanes wiping out all of the profits it had garnered in 75 years of selling homeowners insurance

    Insurance in a Climate of Change: Availability & Affordability

    The rise in sea level caused by climate change will further increase the risk of storm surge.” Most insurers, including the reinsurance companies that bear much of the ultimate risk in the industry, have little time for the arguments heard in some right-wing circles that climate change isn’t happening, and are quite comfortable with the scientific consensus that burning fossil fuels is the main culprit of global warming.

    StopGlobalWarming.org » For Insurers, No Doubts on Climate Change

    Growing evidence suggests that climate change is worsening through droughts and other severe weather events, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods. These natural disasters can destroy homes, cars, businesses and crops, leading to more and larger insurance claims.
    As a result, insurers in some parts of the country have stopped offering coverage, and those that do offer coverage often limit what they cover. It’s also meant higher insurance premiums that many people cannot afford, leaving them uninsured or underinsured.

    Climate Change and your insurance

    Private insurers also point fingers at a changing climate, citing a report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) earlier this year that concluded global warming is to blame for a doubling over the past five years of natural disasters—and that the situation will worsen if nothing is done to stop it.

    Insurers Claim Global Warming Makes Some Regions Too Hot to Handle: Scientific American

    Given that accurate and unbiased weather forecasts are key to property insurers’ business, the fact that the industry broadly accepts that climate change is real and likely to be a problem should be taken seriously by anyone who believes in the power of markets to aggregate information.

    Insurers and Climate Change: The Truth is More Complicated than the Sound Bytes

    Insurance companies are actively looking for more detailed weather and climate data to help make decisions, said Kyle Beatty, senior vice president for business solutions at Atmospheric and Environmental Research (AER). Property and casualty insurance companies have asked AER and 11 other companies to conduct research on tornado and hail frequency in Canada and the United States, Beatty said.

    Billion-Dollar Decisions Held up by Poor Use of Climate Data, Insurers Say - Bloomberg

    There are few industries more exposed to financial risk from climate change than insurance. Every time the ocean creeps into neighborhoods or hurricanes shatter windows or drought kills a planting, it costs insurers money. Unsurprisingly, the industry at large is trying to figure out how to limit its losses from extreme weather events. Individual insurers are a little slower to act.

    Insurers Aren't So Worried About Climate Change That They're Preparing for It - Philip Bump - The Atlantic Wire

    But what may be surprising to E2 members is that more and more, it's the federal government – and not the insurance industry – that pays for cleanup efforts in the aftermath of the kinds of extreme weather events associated with climate change.

    Insurance companies seeing increasing risk from climate change — Climate Solutions

    If climate change raises the probability of horrible outcomes where the insurance companies must payout a fortune, then doesn’t this industry have an incentive to root for carbon mitigation?

    The Economics of Insurance in the Face of Climate Change | Legal Planet: Environmental Law and Policy

    The biggest weather concern is about hurricanes. There also was some concern about wildfires and convective storms that produce tornadoes, thunderstorms and other undesirable weather events.

    Is the Insurance Industry Clueless about the Risks Posed by Climate Change? - Forbes
    I finally read them and LMFAO over and over again. You act like insurance companies are not looking out for their own selfinterest but big energy is. If so you were dupped. If Allstate can exclude the coastal areas and not cover big losses lfriom hurricanes then why wouldn't they? Either get the taxpayer to pay for it or not even cover it. In a previous post I linked to a climate scientist that even said most of the "disater" hyperbole is just that.

  9. #134
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    I can't speak for Ribshaw, but, I would guess it's the part where an anonymous internet poster dares to assume a company or an individual is incapable of coming to a conclusion based on anything but self interest.
    Well I'm not sure there is a cure for naivety so I doubt I can help you there. But you keep believing that self-interst is never involved in any company or individuals conclusion. BTW I bet politicians love you.

  10. #135
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    Pseudo-science is where you draw a conclusion based on the notion that because two companies disagree it therefore proves something.
    Again please quote me IN FULL AND IN CONTEXT. We are not talking about 2 companies we are talking about two industries. And again two industries with access to the same data, same talent and two very different conclusion. It is not a "NOTION", it is a "FACT" For which you with and your vast knowledge 1. Did not even know about until I brought it up. 2. Do not have an answer for other than babbling about Pseudosceince."

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    What part of "companies and individuals reach different conclusion based on their self-interest" do you not comprehend?
    I never said anything close to this, again who are you talking to? In fact it validates my point why the comparison of research methodologies between two big industries is such a good one.
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  11. #136
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    Well I'm not sure there is a cure for naivety so I doubt I can help you there. But you keep believing that self-interst is never involved in any company or individuals conclusion. BTW I bet politicians love you.
    Again, never said anything close to that. Again the need for you to quote in full and in context. And actually Mongo, you made my very point, and much easier than I would have thought.
    Last edited by ribshaw; 06-20-2013 at 07:05 PM.
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  12. #137
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    And where did I ever say that I personally agree with how flood insurance is handleled. Now how is calling the kettle black? I just pointed out the reason why and how flood insurance is handeled. I never once said that I support it.
    Has nothing to do with the CONTEXT of my statement. Hence the need to for you to do a better job of quoting.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    Gee thank you Mr. Wizard as I would never have known that.
    Mongo.JPG

    We can agree on that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    You are my source and proved my point. Since the insurance companies primary goal is to make profits then getting the government and taxpayers to pay for losses resolves this issue. So blame climate change and push any losses onto the taxpayers. But you probably still can't see this as their motive.
    Are you 12? Would you please go back and QUOTE ME IN FULL AND IN CONTEXT. In fact AGAIN you proved one of the very first points I made. As for the rest, please go back an REREAD what I said and quote it IN FULL and IN CONTEXT. You are playing small ball in a big ball discussion. It was explained to you.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    I finally read them and LMFAO over and over again. You act like insurance companies are not looking out for their own selfinterest but big energy is. If so you were dupped. If Allstate can exclude the coastal areas and not cover big losses lfriom hurricanes then why wouldn't they? Either get the taxpayer to pay for it or not even cover it. In a previous post I linked to a climate scientist that even said most of the "disater" hyperbole is just that.
    So let's get this straight all of the research you have that was funded by the Koch's, is touted on the radio, internet, and Fox is the unbiased gospel. There is no "self interest" in a campaign of misinformation from Big Energy? That is what you are selling?

    Again, rather than all your chest thumping about what a genius Mongo is, put up the research, show us who funded it, and show it from Big Insurance and Big Energy. Show us why Insurance companies are lying and Energy companies are telling the truth.
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  13. #138
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    19,835
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    But you keep believing that self-interst is never involved in any company or individuals conclusion.
    Gee, did I say "never" ??

    Here's a tip for ya, Mongo,

    "never" is NOT the same as "always"

    Self interest CAN be involved but is not ALWAYS involved

    Objectivity is possible, you know.

    There are people who believe "A" is the only possible answer

    There are people who believe "B" is the only possible answer.

    There are people who admit they simply cannot form a definite conclusion based on the evidence or lack of available at the current time.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  14. #139
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    In fact, I find your misquoting of me so troubling I went back and quoted myself for you.

    Now, let's examine 2 quotes you made AFTER I made my statements.

    Mongo.JPG
    mongo2.jpg

    Now, let's see what I actually said.

    Capture.jpg
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  15. #140
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Let's do one more of these so we can all be clear on what I said.

    From above:

    Capture1.JPG

    And from prior to that quote, page 5 I believe. Let's see EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.

    Capture.JPG


    Doesn't seem you even came within a stones throw of quoting me correctly, and certainly missed the bigger picture in its entirety.
    "It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403

  16. #141
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    The real harm in the Man Made Global Warming Propaganda Machine has produced these horrific outcomes:

    1) President Obama and The EPA is now requiring each American Coal Fired power plant to spend at least $500 million to sequester CO2. This in turn has bankrupt and shut down over 300 coal fired power plants in America and contributed to the destruction of over 90 million American Jobs.

    2) President Obama and The EPA is and has shut down all American Oil riggs in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska putting 9.8 million Americans out of work.

    3) President Obama and the EPA is now forcing the use of Ethanol that is 9 times more expensive than oil based gasoline, driving the cost of food through the roof around the world causing 100's of millions of people around the world to starve to death every year now. In addition to causing gasoline prices to skyrocket and the cost of everything else to skyrocket.

    And all of this to save us from the fictional thread of "Man Made Global Warming". This is a perfect example of how lies can kill people by the millions.

    Man Made Global Warming is nothing more than an all out war against free market capitalism by Marxist driven Communists around the world at the cost of millions of lives through mass starvation and mass control over the masses through the propaganda of Man Made Global Warming.

    The ramifications of not using fossil fuels is never allowed to be debated at the cost of everyone's lives.


  17. #142
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    3,023
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    The real harm in the Man Made Global Warming Propaganda Machine has produced these horrific outcomes:

    1) President Obama and The EPA is now requiring each American Coal Fired power plant to spend at least $500 million to sequester CO2. This in turn has bankrupt and shut down over 300 coal fired power plants in America and contributed to the destruction of over 90 million American Jobs.

    2) President Obama and The EPA is and has shut down all American Oil riggs in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska putting 9.8 million Americans out of work.

    3) President Obama and the EPA is now forcing the use of Ethanol that is 9 times more expensive than oil based gasoline, driving the cost of food through the roof around the world causing 100's of millions of people around the world to starve to death every year now.

    And all of this to save us from the fictional thread of "Man Made Global Warming". This is a perfect example of how lies can kill people by the millions.

    Please show your math regarding the highlighted section.
    If you are in Prosper With Integrity, and do not like that your personal information has been published here, please talk to these good people: http://www.attorneygeneral.gov http://www.ic3.gov http://www.fbi.gov

  18. #143
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ProfHenryHiggins View Post
    Please show your math regarding the highlighted section.
    http://www.instituteforenergyresearc...res-6.7.12.jpg

    Institute for Energy Research | Powerplants to be closed as a result of EPA’s regulations

    U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants: Update or Close?: Scientific American

    Unprecedented number of US coal-fired power stations to be shut down in 2012

    Report: EPA rules to shut down more than 280 coal-fired units | The Daily Caller

    Report: EPA rules to shut down more than 280 coal-fired units

    11:15 AM 05/03/2013


    Michael Bastasch
    See All Articles
    Email Michael Bastasch
    Subscribe to RSS


    New analysis shows that the coal industry is in for some tough years ahead, as more than 280 coal-fired generating units are slated to be shut down in part due to stricter Environmental Protection Agency regulations.

    The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, a partnership of industry groups, reports that the number of coal plants slated for shutdown is fives times greater than the EPA predicted would be forced to shut down due to its regulations.

    Coal-fired electric generating plants will be shut down across 32 states, with the hardest hit states being Ohio, Pennsylvania, Georgia, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky and Indiana, according to the coalition.



    Ads by Google

    Do You Hate Republicans?Find out what the republicans don't want you to know. Read this now. OnePoliticalPlaza.com
    Golf Swing Tips?Hit Golf Ball Straight Every Time. Free Golf Swing Video Lessons Here! MoeNormanGolf.com


    “Regrettably, the number of coal units being forced to close continues to grow,” said Mike Duncan, president and CEO of ACCCE, in a statement. “Yet, EPA continues to downplay the damage its regulations are causing to the U.S. economy and to the many states that depend on coal for jobs and affordable electricity.”

    The list of coal plants slated for shutdown has been expanding rapidly since last summer when the Energy Information Administration estimated that 175 coal-fired generators — 8.5 percent of the U.S.’s coal-fired capacity — would be retired in the coming years due to declining demand for electricity and stricter environmental regulations.

    In September, ACCCE estimated that more than 200 coal-fired generating units — more than 31,000 megawatts of power — would be shut down across 25 states due to EPA regulations and other factors inducing cheap natural gas.

    The shale boom has caused cheap natural gas to replace some coal consumption and use for power generation, but new environmental regulations have continually made it less economical to build coal plants.

    The EPA’s now-delayed new emissions limits rule for power plants essentially bans the construction of new coal-fired power plants. The rule would limit newly built power plant carbon dioxide emissions to 1,000 pounds-per-megawatt-hour, which only combined-cycle power plants that are powered by natural gas are able to comply with.



    Ads by Google



    Coal plants can comply by with the new emissions rule by using carbon capture and sequestration technology that is not commercially viable.

    Environmentalists have also taken aim at coal plants around the country. The Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign has a goal of retiring one-third of the more than 500 U.S. coal plants by 2020 and replacing the majority of them with green energy power from wind, solar, and geothermal.

    According to the group, burning coal is a major contributor to global warming and leads to as many as 13,000 premature deaths annually and adds more than $100 billion in annual health costs.

    “The coal industry is cracking faster than the ice sheets, but it might not be fast enough,” said Sierra Club attorney Bruce Nilles in an interview.

    The Sierra Club reported last month that 142 coal plants have been slated for retirement since 2010 — in part due to litigation by environmental groups, including the Sierra Club.

    Follow Michael on Twitter

    Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


    Read more: Report: EPA rules to shut down more than 280 coal-fired units | The Daily Caller

    THESE COAL FIRED POWER PLANT CLOSINGS HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED!!!

  19. #144
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ProfHenryHiggins View Post
    Please show your math regarding the highlighted section.
    More proof that there are over 90 million American jobs destroyed by Man Made global Warming:

    http://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2013/04/...s-out-of-work/

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013...king-for-work/

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/20..._dying_country

    People Not In Labor Force Soar By 663,000 To 90 Million, Labor Force Participation Rate At 1979 Levels | Zero Hedge

    People Not In Labor Force Soar By 663,000 To 90 Million, Labor Force Participation Rate At 1979 Levels | Zero Hedge

    People Not In Labor Force Soar By 663,000 To 90 Million, Labor Force Participation Rate At 1979 Levels
    Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 04/05/2013 08:58 -0400

    BLSBureau of Labor StatisticsUnemployment


    Things just keep getting worse for the American worker, and by implication US economy, where as we have shown many times before, it pays just as well to sit back and collect disability and various welfare and entitlement checks, than to work .The best manifestation of this: the number of people not in the labor force which in March soared by a massive 663,000 to a record 90 million Americans who are no longer even looking for work. This was the biggest monthly increase in people dropping out of the labor force since January 2012, when the BLS did its census recast of the labor numbers. And even worse, the labor force participation rate plunged from an already abysmal 63.5% to 63.3% - the lowest since 1979! But at least it helped with the now painfully grotesque propaganda that the US unemployment rate is "improving."


    People not in labor force:

    Labor Force_2.jpgLabor%20Force%20Rate_0.jpg

    Labor participation rate:



    Average:
    4.816325.
    Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (49 votes)

    Remember that when receiving unemployment benefits you must find at least 5 jobs per week, and you can't repeat the same job again. once one has exhausted the list, they are no longer able to find another job application they are forced to no longer being able to find work. This does not mean they stopped looking for jobs, it just means all available jobs are not hiring, and there are no new jobs to be had. Thus forcing ones job search to be force-ably ended.

  20. #145
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    More proof that there are over 90 million American jobs destroyed by Man Made global Warming:

    Obamanomics: 90 Million Americans Out of Work | The Foxhole

    90 Million Americans Are No Longer Looking for Work | The Gateway Pundit

    We Are Living in a Dying Country - The Rush Limbaugh Show

    People Not In Labor Force Soar By 663,000 To 90 Million, Labor Force Participation Rate At 1979 Levels | Zero Hedge

    People Not In Labor Force Soar By 663,000 To 90 Million, Labor Force Participation Rate At 1979 Levels | Zero Hedge

    People Not In Labor Force Soar By 663,000 To 90 Million, Labor Force Participation Rate At 1979 Levels
    Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 04/05/2013 08:58 -0400

    BLSBureau of Labor StatisticsUnemployment


    Things just keep getting worse for the American worker, and by implication US economy, where as we have shown many times before, it pays just as well to sit back and collect disability and various welfare and entitlement checks, than to work .The best manifestation of this: the number of people not in the labor force which in March soared by a massive 663,000 to a record 90 million Americans who are no longer even looking for work. This was the biggest monthly increase in people dropping out of the labor force since January 2012, when the BLS did its census recast of the labor numbers. And even worse, the labor force participation rate plunged from an already abysmal 63.5% to 63.3% - the lowest since 1979! But at least it helped with the now painfully grotesque propaganda that the US unemployment rate is "improving."


    People not in labor force:

    Labor Force_2.jpgLabor%20Force%20Rate_0.jpg

    Labor participation rate:



    Average:
    4.816325.
    Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (49 votes)

    Remember that when receiving unemployment benefits you must find at least 5 jobs per week, and you can't repeat the same job again. once one has exhausted the list, they are no longer able to find another job application they are forced to no longer being able to find work. This does not mean they stopped looking for jobs, it just means all available jobs are not hiring, and there are no new jobs to be had. Thus forcing ones job search to be force-ably ended.
    So in short the recession is responsible for the job losses not global warming.

    And coal plants are shutting down due to a decrease in electricity demand, the low cost of natural gas and some are out date compared to EPA regulations.

    Thankyou showing your math.

  21. #146
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    301
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post

    More proof that there are over 90 million American jobs destroyed by Man Made global Warming:

    People Not In Labor Force Soar By 663,000 To 90 Million, Labor Force Participation Rate At 1979 Levels
    Edmund, the labor force participation rate does not tell us what the unemployment rate is.

    Those 90 million people that you mentioned include about 58 million people who are living on Social Security.

    In other words, most of those 90 million people are not working because they're either retired or they don't need to work.

    There are many reasons why millions of people are not working. In any case, it has nothing to do with global warming.

  22. #147
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,006
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    I grew up in coal producing states, My father worked and retired in a coal fired power plant. His plant had the very latest scrubbers in place and still they had protesters. It is closed down now and it put hundreds of people out of work from my home town. I volunteered one of my computers to crunch numbers for the scientific research for climate control at USC, Berkey and they acknowledge problems with data collection data points. (google Bonic)

  23. #148
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by baylee View Post
    I grew up in coal producing states, My father worked and retired in a coal fired power plant. His plant had the very latest scrubbers in place and still they had protesters. It is closed down now and it put hundreds of people out of work from my home town. I volunteered one of my computers to crunch numbers for the scientific research for climate control at USC, Berkey and they acknowledge problems with data collection data points. (google Bonic)
    I"m sure there are going to be a lot more coal plants shutting down. However, in truth it has very very little to do with global warming or Carbon in General.

    Natural Gas prices have deceased and coal prices have increased. Thus it makes more economic sense to use Natural gas.

    Solar and wind power are also quickly catching up to both.

    Long story short is that capitalism works. It can be pushed and development can be focused but it's capitalism that's doing it.

  24. #149
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,006
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    I"m sure there are going to be a lot more coal plants shutting down. However, in truth it has very very little to do with global warming or Carbon in General.

    Natural Gas prices have deceased and coal prices have increased. Thus it makes more economic sense to use Natural gas.

    Solar and wind power are also quickly catching up to both.

    Long story short is that capitalism works. It can be pushed and development can be focused but it's capitalism that's doing it.
    Capitalism is the best system in the world bar none, but it can be manipulated and with legislative and or regulations.

  25. #150
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by baylee View Post
    Capitalism is the best system in the world bar none, but it can be manipulated and with legislative and or regulations.
    That's the governments job. Capitalism only works for itself. It cares nothing for the country, the individual or the family.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •