Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
22 minutes ago.
by Stillhere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

Stillhere

Of course not HARRY, care to retract your claim that 2014 was the hottest on record or do facts not matter in that case?

Posted 92 days ago.

Stillhere

Margin of error?

Posted 92 days ago.

harryanderson

Major-party leaders in our closest ally, Britain, have agreed not to politicize the conclusion of almost all climate scientists.

Conservative Party leader (and Prime Minister) David Cameron has agreed to fight climate change with the leaders of the two major opposition parties.

“David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband have signed a joint pledge to tackle climate change, which they say will protect the UK’s national security and economic prosperity. The agreement of the three party leaders is highly unusual and comes amid a general election campaign that is becoming increasingly bitter.”

htt p://ww w.theguardian.co m/environment/2015/feb/14/cameron-clegg-and-miliband-sign-joint-climate-pledge

I applaud this move. The risk associated with anthropogenic climate change should be a scientific, not a political, issue.

Posted 92 days ago.

moderation

Which one, absolem?

Posted 92 days ago.

absolem

i tend to believe that most rational people will agree with your post.

Posted 94 days ago.

Kunectdots

absolem - When it comes to science, my belief has always been that if anything can be conceived as a reasonable possibility, someone with the wherewithal IS going to attempt it eventually, laws created against it's development be d-amned.

If it is a concept offering both beneficial and detrimental possibilities, the detrimental side will take form, surreptitiously, when the right people figure it will benefit their cause(s).

Posted 95 days ago.

absolem

he said. Other funders included Nasa, the US Department of Energy, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The use of the weather as a weapon was banned in 1978 under the Environmental Modification Convention (Enmod). the above is a partial representation of the article. this goes along with the concern expressed by some about the HAARP program. it would be interesting to see how the program is reconciled against the aforementioned law banning use of weather as a weapon. Kunectdots...you may not be as out there as some claim. the strange stops being strange when it is proven real.

Posted 95 days ago.

absolem

from The Guardian: "A senior US scientist has expressed concern that the intelligence services are funding climate change research to learn if new technologies could be used as potential weapons. Alan Robock, a climate scientist at Rutgers University in New Jersey, has called on secretive government agencies to be open about their interest in radical work that explores how to alter the world’s climate. Last week, the National Academy of Sciences published a two-volume report on different approaches to tackling climate change. One focused on means to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, the other on ways to change clouds or the Earth’s surface to make them reflect more sunlight out to space.The $600,000 report was part-funded by the US intelligence services, but Robock said the CIA and other agencies had not fully explained their interest in the work. “The CIA was a major funder of the National Academies report so that makes me really worried who is going to be in control,”

Posted 95 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Stupid grapes make for poor liars !

Posted 95 days ago.

Kunectdots

Stillhere - I HEAR YA, BROTHER! Imagine, on a day like this, if we had no energy entrepreneurs, exploring for fuel sources on private properties. With a scab on society, like our present glorious leader trying to limit the fossil fuel powered industries of the U.S., we'd all be waiting for his vaunted solar panels to generate some electricity to warm us. Looks kinda cloudy out there, BARACK!

Better have plenty of blankets laid-up for any future Executive Order barrages. Obummer, unfortunately, will be with us through another one and a half winters.

Posted 95 days ago.

Stillhere

Global-warming ‘proof’ is evaporatinG

NY post

Posted 95 days ago.

Stillhere

How's that global warming working out for ya? -2f.

Posted 95 days ago.

Stillhere

sour grapes=bitter whine

Posted 95 days ago.

Ohwiseone

The only loser is the liar ! And you know who that is ! Keep going , its just a matter of time ! LOLOL!

Posted 96 days ago.

Stillhere

Yes we do, thanks for admitting it remember, SOUR GRAPES produce BITTER WHINE

Posted 96 days ago.

Ohwiseone

The only loser is the liar ! And you know who that is !

Posted 96 days ago.

Kunectdots

HarryAnderson - I think these people may have a little bit more going on than you or Al Gore can imagine, although I bet Al is a little more 'connected' than you are.

HAARP; "The Military's Pandora's Box"

h ttp://haarp.n et/

Posted 96 days ago.

Stillhere

Remember sour grapes produce bitter whine

Posted 97 days ago.

Stillhere

Don't be so hard in yourself..........you are taking away my fun

Posted 97 days ago.

Ohwiseone

The only loser is the liar ! And you know who that is !

Posted 97 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or