Over 400 Scientists Challenge Gore's Man-Made Global Warming Claims

[Farang]

Many people don't understand that the developing world is being hurt the most by the idea of man-made global warming. To say 'even if Al Gore is wrong, it isn't bad to burng cleaner fuels' is foolish. This question needs to be settled one way or another because we're either going to kill the entire planet with this menace or kill half of it trying to save ourselves from a menace that doesn't exist.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Farang
Many people don't understand that the developing world is being hurt the most by the idea of man-made global warming. To say 'even if Al Gore is wrong, it isn't bad to burng cleaner fuels' is foolish. This question needs to be settled one way or another because we're either going to kill the entire planet with this menace or kill half of it trying to save ourselves from a menace that doesn't exist.

:thumbsup:

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Slick5150
Yeah, you're right. We need more impartial scientific studies done by the Republican staff of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. They are the true experts on this issue afterall.

so what exactly are your credentials to judge what is impartial verses actual truth?
Or are you just spouting off again?

So what exactly are your credentials to challenge the conclusions of the vast majority of climatologists and meteorologists that man made pollution is a major contributor to global warming?

Or are you just spouting off again? :Q

 

[conehead433]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: conehead433
How many of these scientists have won the Nobel prize?

Al Gore won a Peace Prize....not a prize for science.

I didn't specify for what any of them had won the prize, and I am fully aware of Gore's prize.
Any group of people can have an opinion. I'm sure that 400 scientists supporting the claim could easily be found.

 

[Thund3rb1rd]

Originally posted by: bamacre
What's going on here is the Republicans are pissed off at their competition in the fear market.

Americans will vote for whoever is out to save them, whichever party gives them the best security blanket. They just want to sleep well at night knowing their party is working so hard to save them.

So we have the two parties screaming "terrorism!" and "global warming!" and Americans are eating it up, all the while, trying to find a comfortable way of sitting down with a huge government vaccum cleaner attached to their wallets.

In the end, I don't want to blame the parties, I'd rather blame their constituents, for being stupid enough to fall for these shenanigans. But I can't, because there's a fucking vacuum cleaner attached to my wallet as well, and frankly, I'm getting pretty sick of it.

Closest to the truth statement I have read in months.
And, ever on P&N.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

FTA

After a quick review of the report, Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider said 25 or 30 of the scientists may have received funding from Exxon Mobil Corp.

Why is Mr Gore resorting the ad hominem attacks? Argue the message. I believe in AGW but accusations like this really get under my skin. Even if they are shills for Exxon, their bias will show up in their studies. Attack the message.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: conehead433

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: conehead433
How many of these scientists have won the Nobel prize?

Al Gore won a Peace Prize....not a prize for science.

I didn't specify for what any of them had won the prize, and I am fully aware of Gore's prize.
Any group of people can have an opinion. I'm sure that 400 scientists supporting the claim could easily be found.

So now you're not a credible scientist unless you've won the Nobel prize?

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: conehead433

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: conehead433
How many of these scientists have won the Nobel prize?

Al Gore won a Peace Prize....not a prize for science.

I didn't specify for what any of them had won the prize, and I am fully aware of Gore's prize.
Any group of people can have an opinion. I'm sure that 400 scientists supporting the claim could easily be found.

So now you're not a credible scientist unless you've won the Nobel prize?

There wouldnt be many credible scientists then, now would there.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
I would rather error on the side of clean air and reduced emissions rather than find out too late we f0cked our own planet. What is so bad about not sh!tting in your own house? keep it clean i say.

I don't think thats the issue really.

I think there is a danger that this fear and hysteria that is trying to be generated will lead to facism.

Oh, brother. The generated fear and hysteria that can lead to fascism is coming from the republican party - 9/11, Iraq, 9/11, Iran, 9/11 9/11 - not global warming.

Usually I think you are nutty but this is right on the money. Funny how the hacks only care about things that are generally accepted as bad when the other side is doing it...

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
400 scientists, wow!

Compare that with this tid bit I found on the web:

"Taking into account only those working in the relevant fields of earth and life sciences, there are about 480,000 scientists, but only about 700 believe in "creation-science" or consider it a valid theory (Robinson 1995)."

Yeah but God didn't say anything about global warming!!!!!!!!!1111111111111

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
I would rather error on the side of clean air and reduced emissions rather than find out too late we f0cked our own planet. What is so bad about not sh!tting in your own house? keep it clean i say.

I don't think thats the issue really.

I think there is a danger that this fear and hysteria that is trying to be generated will lead to facism.

Oh, brother. The generated fear and hysteria that can lead to fascism is coming from the republican party - 9/11, Iraq, 9/11, Iran, 9/11 9/11 - not global warming.

Usually I think you are nutty but this is right on the money. Funny how the hacks only care about things that are generally accepted as bad when the other side is doing it...

Facism is usually rung in with thundering applause.

Terrorism is no longer the bogey man...its MMGW

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: Farang
Many people don't understand that the developing world is being hurt the most by the idea of man-made global warming. To say 'even if Al Gore is wrong, it isn't bad to burng cleaner fuels' is foolish. This question needs to be settled one way or another because we're either going to kill the entire planet with this menace or kill half of it trying to save ourselves from a menace that doesn't exist.

:thumbsdown:

Please explain how we half the planet would be killed by burning cleaner fuels.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
I would rather error on the side of clean air and reduced emissions rather than find out too late we f0cked our own planet. What is so bad about not sh!tting in your own house? keep it clean i say.

I don't think thats the issue really.

I think there is a danger that this fear and hysteria that is trying to be generated will lead to facism.

Oh, brother. The generated fear and hysteria that can lead to fascism is coming from the republican party - 9/11, Iraq, 9/11, Iran, 9/11 9/11 - not global warming.

Usually I think you are nutty but this is right on the money. Funny how the hacks only care about things that are generally accepted as bad when the other side is doing it...

I think your post can be found under the word 'backhanded compliment' in the dictionary

I'd encourage you to actually speak up and make the case if you see a post you have an issue with - at least one of us may learn something in the exchange.

Thanks for the note here.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: JD50
So now you're not a credible scientist unless you've won the Nobel prize?

Left-wing extremist thinking ... at its finest :laugh:

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
I would rather error on the side of clean air and reduced emissions rather than find out too late we f0cked our own planet. What is so bad about not sh!tting in your own house? keep it clean i say.

I don't think thats the issue really.

I think there is a danger that this fear and hysteria that is trying to be generated will lead to facism.

Oh, brother. The generated fear and hysteria that can lead to fascism is coming from the republican party - 9/11, Iraq, 9/11, Iran, 9/11 9/11 - not global warming.

Usually I think you are nutty but this is right on the money. Funny how the hacks only care about things that are generally accepted as bad when the other side is doing it...

I think your post can be found under the word 'backhanded compliment' in the dictionary

I'd encourage you to actually speak up and make the case if you see a post you have an issue with - at least one of us may learn something in the exchange.

Thanks for the note here.

Well I didn't mean to come off that harsh - nutty was the wrong word. I think you are a bit extreme sometimes, but that is relative to ones own personal politics and opinions

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
I would rather error on the side of clean air and reduced emissions rather than find out too late we f0cked our own planet. What is so bad about not sh!tting in your own house? keep it clean i say.

I don't think thats the issue really.

I think there is a danger that this fear and hysteria that is trying to be generated will lead to facism.

Oh, brother. The generated fear and hysteria that can lead to fascism is coming from the republican party - 9/11, Iraq, 9/11, Iran, 9/11 9/11 - not global warming.

Usually I think you are nutty but this is right on the money. Funny how the hacks only care about things that are generally accepted as bad when the other side is doing it...

Facism is usually rung in with thundering applause.

Terrorism is no longer the bogey man...its MMGW

Comparing terrorism and war to global warming?

Come on, that is a bit of a reach and you know it.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: jman19
Comparing terrorism and war to global warming?

Come on, that is a bit of a reach and you know it.

Liberals love to make fallacious analogies.

The only thing the two have in common is lots of people making big money. Liberals too! :laugh:

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

Sorry, Al. If I had to take the word of a significant number of scientists or yours, I think the decision is pretty easy. It's laughable how the media has annointed Al as some kind of Einstein when the guy has no credentials. Zero.

The only question now is how long will "carbon credits" be a booming business?

Could you find a more bi-assed source and story? No, I don't think so. Are these the same scientists with PHDs in dentistry and doggy hair grooming in previous articles?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
Could you find a more bi-assed source and story? No, I don't think so. Are these the same scientists with PHDs in dentistry and doggy hair grooming in previous articles?

Yeah, Washington Times may well be biased, but at least they're credible.

Now if you can prove an error in their story, please present it. Otherwise, you're obfuscating and blowing smoke...as usual. :|

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: jman19
Comparing terrorism and war to global warming?

Come on, that is a bit of a reach and you know it.

Liberals love to make fallacious analogies.

The only thing the two have in common is lots of people making big money. Liberals too! :laugh:

GoPackGo is a liberal?

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
I would rather error on the side of clean air and reduced emissions rather than find out too late we f0cked our own planet. What is so bad about not sh!tting in your own house? keep it clean i say.

I don't think thats the issue really.

I think there is a danger that this fear and hysteria that is trying to be generated will lead to facism.

Oh, brother. The generated fear and hysteria that can lead to fascism is coming from the republican party - 9/11, Iraq, 9/11, Iran, 9/11 9/11 - not global warming.

Usually I think you are nutty but this is right on the money. Funny how the hacks only care about things that are generally accepted as bad when the other side is doing it...

Facism is usually rung in with thundering applause.

Terrorism is no longer the bogey man...its MMGW

Comparing terrorism and war to global warming?

Come on, that is a bit of a reach and you know it.

They of themselves are not the same.

What they are being used to accomplish is exactly the same.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Thund3rb1rd

Originally posted by: bamacre
What's going on here is the Republicans are pissed off at their competition in the fear market.

Americans will vote for whoever is out to save them, whichever party gives them the best security blanket. They just want to sleep well at night knowing their party is working so hard to save them.

So we have the two parties screaming "terrorism!" and "global warming!" and Americans are eating it up, all the while, trying to find a comfortable way of sitting down with a huge government vaccum cleaner attached to their wallets.

In the end, I don't want to blame the parties, I'd rather blame their constituents, for being stupid enough to fall for these shenanigans. But I can't, because there's a fucking vacuum cleaner attached to my wallet as well, and frankly, I'm getting pretty sick of it.

Closest to the truth statement I have read in months.
And, ever on P&N.

You know, it's truer than it may even look at first glance, explaining decades of our history.

Basically, the modern history of American politics, if you begin with the modern industrial age a bit over a century ago, consists of things sucking quote a bit for most Americans in poverty and terrible conditions; after two republican periods ended badly, the 1890's and the roaring 20's, the public saw who improved things - the progressives in the early 1900's and the democrats in the 1930's and 1940's.

The republicans were a beaten party. They tried every which way to win - say the democratic programs were bad, say that they'd offer the democratic programs too, and whatever they did the public said, 'why would we want you back?' It was a tough situation for them where they couldn't win on honest head to head politicis.

After WWII, they saw their opening: the red menace. It wasn't that Stalin wasn't a monster and his communist system a tyrannical disaster; both parties took that position. The republicans found an issue to get elected on by claiming that the communists were *taking over America*, that they were secretly all over our government ready to conquer our country and the democrats weren't doing anything about it.

Well, they were partly right, the democrats weren't doing much about it, because it was pretty much a load of hooey - but it had the desired effect. By creating the fear in the public, they were able to make the democrats look 'weak', on the defensive denying the problem (which happened to pretty much be the truth). And it worked. Suddenly, following Truman's unpopularity after he got rid of McCarthur, the republicans found themselves with the presidency and both houses of Congress, and a new right-wing culture in fear.

This spawned a lot of things - McCarthy with his phony lists of the communists in government, witch hunts to create the bad guys from mostly good American leftists, a whole culture of paranoia that founded the basis of the growth of the new American right (see the John Birch Society). It had a price, which included our foreign policy - the 'tough talk' to get elected had to be backed up in policy, so you saw Winston Churchill furious with the Eisenhower administration for an unnecessarily hostile, and therefore dangerous, attitude towards the USSR; where Churchill, the man who stood firm against appeasment with Hitler, encouraged the US to use a softer approach with the USSR; where the US sided with dictators and drove nation after nation further to the left in reaction, from our opposition to the people of Vietnam being free, ignoring their please for us to help them have a constitution like ours, to Eisenhower's snubbing of Castro. The prices? Aside from the increased danger of nuclear war with Russia, these were the foundations for the Vietnam War, for the 40 year standoff with Cuba just off our shore, for the Cuban Missile Crisis.

But it was worth it to them - it worked to get them power. The democrats came to be seen as the 'weak' party on foreign policy, and you had republicans like Reagan making fun of the democrats and making trash talk statements towards the USSR (take down this wall), even while his actual policies were despicable (siding with and funding death squads and terrorist armies in Central America, selling missiles to Iran illegally, through Israel creating obligations as we then sent Marines to help Israel invade Lebanon, who were blown up by a bomb and saw Reagan then flee Lebanon, invaded Grenada for no valid reason, etc.) But many of the American people liked the 'strong' talk by Reagan, and kept him in office.

With the fall of the Soviet Union, the 'threat' of Iraq under Bush 41 wasn't enough to get him re-elected despite near 90% approval ratings for the war, and the republicans saw that they'd need another threat to replace communism which had served them so well for 40 years. Hello, islamofasicsts 9/11.

So, his statement really explains a lot about the last half century of American politics.

They learned that the cloak of fear of some threat gives them license for almost anything, including the effective theft of countless billions in debt. Huge debt didn't cost Reagan or Bush 43 re-election. Slogans like 'Support our Troops' successfully propagandized the American public to equate questioning the foreign policy with hating the troops, so that ironically, opposing the troops being sent to an unnecessary and illegal war, saving their lives, was an anti-troop position.

But where do you see this sort of historical analysis outside of books and liberal web sites?

The rest of the world can see the propagandization of the American people, but our nation can't see that.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
I would rather error on the side of clean air and reduced emissions rather than find out too late we f0cked our own planet. What is so bad about not sh!tting in your own house? keep it clean i say.

I don't think thats the issue really.

I think there is a danger that this fear and hysteria that is trying to be generated will lead to facism.

Oh, brother. The generated fear and hysteria that can lead to fascism is coming from the republican party - 9/11, Iraq, 9/11, Iran, 9/11 9/11 - not global warming.

Usually I think you are nutty but this is right on the money. Funny how the hacks only care about things that are generally accepted as bad when the other side is doing it...

Facism is usually rung in with thundering applause.

Terrorism is no longer the bogey man...its MMGW

Comparing terrorism and war to global warming?

Come on, that is a bit of a reach and you know it.

They of themselves are not the same.

What they are being used to accomplish is exactly the same.

I would say the magnitude of them, and the social perceptions and ramifications of them are FAR different. Do you really think "global warming" is as scary to the average joe as "getting blown up by a terrorist"?

 

[Rainsford]

I hate to ask an obvious question, but how many of these 400 scientists are published climate scientists? How many of them object to man-made climate change in general and not just Gore's presentation of it? How many scientists SUPPORT Gore's man-made climate change claims?

These all seem to be vital questions that the 487 threads about this don't answer. We're talking science here, being precise seems important, yet the arguments against man-made climate change seem suspiciously vague.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: conehead433

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: conehead433
How many of these scientists have won the Nobel prize?

Al Gore won a Peace Prize....not a prize for science.

I didn't specify for what any of them had won the prize, and I am fully aware of Gore's prize.
Any group of people can have an opinion. I'm sure that 400 scientists supporting the claim could easily be found.

So now you're not a credible scientist unless you've won the Nobel prize?

God damn it! Can you fucking idiots that know NOTHING about science shut the fuck up already? JD50 i believe you barely graduated from high school, right? I think you claimed to do well on the exam for the military, but i saw that exam and a monkey could score "well" on it. So, what exactly are you credentials to be critical of the scientific method?