 |
|
|
|||||
| « Previous thread | Next thread » |
On Oct 31, 6:29 pm, john fernbach <f...@y...com> wrote:
> A spokeswoman from the MacArthur Foundation cites Bonzo's remarkable
> ability to rebut mainstream climate science just by making up new
> dictionary words that characterize legitimate climate researchers as
> hopeless neurotics.
>
> "Humpty Dumpty had it right in "Alice in Wonderland,' and Bonzo the
> Great has proven it," the Foundation staffer said. "You CAN make
> words mean anything you want them to just by insisting on it!"
>
> Bonzo the Great also is engaged in an even more ambitious effort to
> negate the reality of Anthropogenic Climate Change simply by
> relabeling it, the MacArthur staffer noted.
>
> "We think this is an amazingly important process for the future of the
> planet," she said. "If Bonzo succeeds, then the entire mitigation
> report issued recently by the IPCC will turn out to be moot, and
> governments and corporations around the world may save hundreds of
> billions of dollars simply through the denial of reality."
"""report issued recently by the IPCC will turn out to be moot, """"
"""denial of reality""""
Little minds that use words they cannot define. REALITY is that the
IPCC has no direct science. Direct science does not leave a 90% rating
of validity. Falsification of reality is that there is enough actual
science to support the programs of AGW. No burden of proof can be met.
It is pure insanity to act on the IPCC's recomendations.
The report from the IPCC was only given a 90% probability of being
valid by themselves. This is to give themselves a legal out, when
actual science is conducted that will prove them invalid. The
politicians will not be able to lay all of the blame for their crimes
on these scientists of the IPCC with only their 90% rating. This means
the politicians will go to jail, although they may at the present time
feel themselves above the law and able to impose their subjective
beliefs about climate and taxation upon our economy as they choose.
Whoever this is attacking Bonzo is insane. When allowance taxes are
place upon electrical generation, the burden is placed upon the
average person. Their hatred of US industry and modern lifestyles is
falsly portrayed as 'concern for the environment', or for effects of
global warming.
Here is a statement from someone within the IPCC.
http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_con
tent&task=view&id=155&Itemid=1
The weenies can ignore the actual science and their terminal lack of
science, and claim that their only opposition is the capitalists who
want to make profits instead of grounding the economy in unjustified
allowance taxes and unlimited funding to scientifically illiterate
idiots, who dominate the science of climate scaremongering..
Of course the weenie mentality of the greenies like Fernfag here will
find the means to dismiss such statements, and the weenies whom he
quoted here can continue with their HOLY WAR against the people upon
whom they are making war. And then, in the finest of weenie mentality,
they can claim that the people upon whom THEY are aggressing, are
guilty of causing the fight when they choose to fight back.
Good luck in hell, Fernfag and co.
The analysis of your science was not concluded by the recent IPCC
report. Nor was it concluded by the god of the religion of AGW,
algore's statement that the debate is over. Nor will the scientific
inquiry be concluded if this bullshit is passed into US law. Although
the weenies like the idea, and yearn for the opposition to their junk
science to cease to exist by calling them names, like 'denialists',
the real fact is that,
THE DEBATE IS JUST BEGINNING.
KD
On Oct 31, 10:50 pm, k...@y...com wrote:
> On Oct 31, 6:29 pm, john fernbach <f...@y...com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > A spokeswoman from the MacArthur Foundation cites Bonzo's remarkable
> > ability to rebut mainstream climate science just by making up new
> > dictionary words that characterize legitimate climate researchers as
> > hopeless neurotics.
>
> > "Humpty Dumpty had it right in "Alice in Wonderland,' and Bonzo the
> > Great has proven it," the Foundation staffer said. "You CAN make
> > words mean anything you want them to just by insisting on it!"
>
> > Bonzo the Great also is engaged in an even more ambitious effort to
> > negate the reality of Anthropogenic Climate Change simply by
> > relabeling it, the MacArthur staffer noted.
>
> > "We think this is an amazingly important process for the future of the
> > planet," she said. "If Bonzo succeeds, then the entire mitigation
> > report issued recently by the IPCC will turn out to be moot, and
> > governments and corporations around the world may save hundreds of
> > billions of dollars simply through the denial of reality."
>
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/tr
ee/browse_frm/thread/af9d74859f29528e/d7f3f4c7182705
50?hl=en&rnum=1&_done=%2Fgroup%2Falt.global-warming%
2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2Faf9d74859f29528e%3Fhl%3Den%2
6#doc_d7f3f4c718270550
> """report issued recently by the IPCC will turn out to be moot, """"
> """denial of reality""""
>
> Little minds that use words they cannot define. REALITY is that the
> IPCC has no direct science. Direct science does not leave a 90% rating
> of validity. Falsification of reality is that there is enough actual
> science to support the programs of AGW. No burden of proof can be met.
> It is pure insanity to act on the IPCC's recomendations.
>
> The report from the IPCC was only given a 90% probability of being
> valid by themselves. This is to give themselves a legal out, when
> actual science is conducted that will prove them invalid. The
> politicians will not be able to lay all of the blame for their crimes
> on these scientists of the IPCC with only their 90% rating. This means
> the politicians will go to jail, although they may at the present time
> feel themselves above the law and able to impose their subjective
> beliefs about climate and taxation upon our economy as they choose.
>
> Whoever this is attacking Bonzo is insane. When allowance taxes are
> place upon electrical generation, the burden is placed upon the
> average person. Their hatred of US industry and modern lifestyles is
> falsly portrayed as 'concern for the environment', or for effects of
> global warming.
>
> Here is a statement from someone within the
IPCC.http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=co
m_content&task=view&id...
>
> The weenies can ignore the actual science and their terminal lack of
> science, and claim that their only opposition is the capitalists who
> want to make profits instead of grounding the economy in unjustified
> allowance taxes and unlimited funding to scientifically illiterate
> idiots, who dominate the science of climate scaremongering..
>
> Of course the weenie mentality of the greenies like Fernfag here will
> find the means to dismiss such statements, and the weenies whom he
> quoted here can continue with their HOLY WAR against the people upon
> whom they are making war. And then, in the finest of weenie mentality,
> they can claim that the people upon whom THEY are aggressing, are
> guilty of causing the fight when they choose to fight back.
>
> Good luck in hell, Fernfag and co.
>
> The analysis of your science was not concluded by the recent IPCC
> report. Nor was it concluded by the god of the religion of AGW,
> algore's statement that the debate is over. Nor will the scientific
> inquiry be concluded if this bullshit is passed into US law. Although
> the weenies like the idea, and yearn for the opposition to their junk
> science to cease to exist by calling them names, like 'denialists',
> the real fact is that,
>
> THE DEBATE IS JUST BEGINNING.
>
> KD- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
On Oct 31, 11:50 pm, k...@y...com wrote:
> On Oct 31, 6:29 pm, john fernbach <f...@y...com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > A spokeswoman from the MacArthur Foundation cites Bonzo's remarkable
> > ability to rebut mainstream climate science just by making up new
> > dictionary words that characterize legitimate climate researchers as
> > hopeless neurotics.
>
> > "Humpty Dumpty had it right in "Alice in Wonderland,' and Bonzo the
> > Great has proven it," the Foundation staffer said. "You CAN make
> > words mean anything you want them to just by insisting on it!"
>
> > Bonzo the Great also is engaged in an even more ambitious effort to
> > negate the reality of Anthropogenic Climate Change simply by
> > relabeling it, the MacArthur staffer noted.
>
> > "We think this is an amazingly important process for the future of the
> > planet," she said. "If Bonzo succeeds, then the entire mitigation
> > report issued recently by the IPCC will turn out to be moot, and
> > governments and corporations around the world may save hundreds of
> > billions of dollars simply through the denial of reality."
>
> """report issued recently by the IPCC will turn out to be moot, """"
> """denial of reality""""
>
> Little minds that use words they cannot define. REALITY is that the
> IPCC has no direct science. Direct science does not leave a 90% rating
> of validity. Falsification of reality is that there is enough actual
> science to support the programs of AGW. No burden of proof can be met.
> It is pure insanity to act on the IPCC's recomendations.
"Pure insanity," eh? I guess that's better than impure insanity, or
insanity that's -- say -- only 90% pure.
:-)
"I'm 90% sure that the chapparal behind my house is going to catch
fire and burn within the next few years.
I don't know for certain that it will, but I don't want to take
chances -- I need to buy fire insurance."
"NO! That's PURE INSANITY."
Uh-huh. You go, guy.
> The report from the IPCC was only given a 90% probability of being
> valid by themselves. This is to give themselves a legal out, when
> actual science is conducted that will prove them invalid. The
> politicians will not be able to lay all of the blame for their crimes
> on these scientists of the IPCC with only their 90% rating.
CRIMES - oh, no, say it isn't so.
"I think I want to insure my house against an estimated 90% chance of
wildfire."
"NO - THAT WOULD BE A ** CRIME ** "
Uh-huh. Words of wisdom, Keith. And what a moderate way you have of
expressing yourself, too!
This means
> the politicians will go to jail, although they may at the present time
> feel themselves above the law and able to impose their subjective
> beliefs about climate and taxation upon our economy as they choose.
>
We're going to start jailing politicians for making bad guesses about
reality? Like about - say, the Iraq War?
Or regulation of the US financial sector?
: - ) Don't think so, Keith.
> Whoever this is attacking Bonzo is insane.
Are you 100% sure of this Keith? Or is there only a 90% chance that
I'm insane?
Or maybe there's only a 10% chance that I'm insane? :-)
When allowance taxes are
> place upon electrical generation, the burden is placed upon the
> average person.
Anyone who wants to tax the electric utilities must be an insane
criminal psychopath & terrorist, no question.
"Why is Malik being held at Guantanamo? He fly a jetliner into the
World Trade Center? He bombed
the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983? Attacked the USS Cole?"
"WORSE THAN THAT - He tried to impose taxes on the electric
utilities!"
"Oh. Well. Hang him, then ..."
-----------------------
Their hatred of US industry and modern lifestyles is
> falsly portrayed as 'concern for the environment', or for effects of
> global warming.
Hmm. Maybe AGW will turn out to be an illusion, despite the fact that
the theory is now endorsed
by the National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Academy, and
the national science academies
of something like 30 different nations. Plus the IPCC, of course, and
also THE ECONOMIST & the Bush White House & the Obama campaign and the
McCain campain.
But if the AGW theory is correct, as many of these scientific bodies &
capitalist politicians & capitalist business magazines believe it is,
then the continuation of utility CO2 emissions is going to play hell
with the "modern lifestyles" of many Americans, isn't it?
I mean - The climate scientists are predicting that it means more
severe droughts and probably a greater risk of summer wildfires for
Southern California, Arizona, New Mexico, and maybe some other
southwestern states in the US.
It may well mean more prolonged droughts in Australia, of the sort
that occurred over the past 6-7 years or so. This could well affect
world wheat production, with a bad effect on the world's ability to
fight hunger & starvation.
And what if Kerry Emmanuel at MIT is right, and more CO2 emissions
bring more climate change, and more climate change means that
hurricanes in the Atlantic become more destructive -- with future big
hurricane damage to Miami, New Orleans, Galveston, TX, and the luxury
homes and casinos along the Gulf Coast?
>
Doesn't this hurt many people's "modern lifestyles" just a tad, Keith
Boy?
And by the way, aren't you kind of playing Don Quixote here, by
tilting against the future energy potential of windmills?
Not to mention nuclear power, of course.
I don't like nuclear power much, but one way to preserve
our "modern lifestyles" and the sacred AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE (and high
utility bills!) without
relying on CO2-emitting fossil fuel production would be to rely more
on those big friendly nuclear reactors that we all want to have
located in our backyards.
So it may be that some of the "green weenies" who so enrage you are
just ambitious would-be nuclear engineers, Keith. Surely you don't
find them to be anti-American and opposed to "modern lifestyles," do
you?
> Here is a statement from someone within the
IPCC.http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=co
m_content&task=view&id...
>
> The weenies can ignore the actual science and their terminal lack of
> science, and claim that their only opposition is the capitalists who
> want to make profits instead of grounding the economy in unjustified
> allowance taxes and unlimited funding to scientifically illiterate
> idiots, who dominate the science of climate scaremongering..
My, my. "Scientifically illiterate idiots, who dominate the science
of climate scaremongering."
The scientists who believe in AGW may be wrong, Keith -- but you
really think they're "scientifically
illiterate?"
Or are they just illiterate about the enormous, stupendous, almost
heavenly virtues of coal-fired and oil-fired electric utility
generation? :-)
>
> Of course the weenie mentality of the greenies like Fernfag
NOT "FERNFAG"!
OMIGOD, HE CALLED ME A NAME AND ACCUSED ME OF BEING GAY!
OH, I'M MELTING .... I'M MELTING ... MELTING ...
here will
> find the means to dismiss such statements, and the weenies whom he
> quoted here can continue with their HOLY WAR against the people upon
> whom they are making war.
Not Holy War! No! No!
It's all right to promote hatred against environmentalists and climate
scientists, sure,
but to wage "Holy War" against the fossil fuel industry???
Just because it's intent on cooking the planet???
Oh, the sheer gall of it!
And then, in the finest of weenie mentality,
> they can claim that the people upon whom THEY are aggressing, are
> guilty of causing the fight when they choose to fight back.
>
> Good luck in hell, Fernfag and co.
I'm kind of wondering, if people like you continue to prevail in
setting US energy policy,
if I'll be able to tell the difference between Hell and the normal
weather in Southern California, Keith.
But thanks for your good wishes.
>
> The analysis of your science was not concluded by the recent IPCC
> report. Nor was it concluded by the god of the religion of AGW,
The "god of the religion of AGW" -- uh huh.
> algore's statement that the debate is over.
Now you're really in trouble, Keith. I have a huge altar to Al Gore
erected in my 530-sq ft apartment,
and I sacrifice the children of AGW Denialists to it every day.
If you're denying godlike status to Gore -- if you're hoping to leave
us poor AGW believers with no one to admire except for Hansen, Stephen
Schneider, Wallace Broecker, Kerry Emmanuel, Sir James Lovelock, Sir
Johh Houghton in the UK, and the editors of the Scientific American,
The Economist, Business Week, Nature, and the climate change staffers
of the Obama and McCain campaigns -- well, you're just shattering my
whole worldview, you bad man, you.
Without Al Gore to guide me, and with only the national science
academies of about 30 different industrialized nations to guide my
thinking on AGW - how can a poor green weenie like me cope?
Nor will the scientific
> inquiry be concluded if this bullshit is passed into US law. Although
> the weenies like the idea, and yearn for the opposition to their junk
> science to cease to exist by calling them names, like 'denialists',
> the real fact is that,
>
> THE DEBATE IS JUST BEGINNING.
I thought it began awhile ago, actually.
Did I just imagine the fact that people like you have been attacking
mainstream AGW believers
as liars, criminals, traitors, atheists, religious fanatics, etc. etc.
for the past 3-4 years in this
usenet group, Keith?
Have AGWers like me just been imagining the past 20 years of Fossil
Fuel industry attacks on mainstream climate science?
> KD- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
| « Previous thread | Next thread » |
How would Allah want to help now?
Re: NASA's James Hansen to the Rescue!
Re: Chronic ice retreat puts "record cold" events in context
Re: Insect Population Growth Likely Accelerated By Warmer Climate
.SBS TV , First Australians ,final episode 7 Sunday 2 november 8.30
Re: Climate Change and Dwindling Species
Re: Climate Change and Dwindling Species
Up