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
6 hours ago.
by Ohwiseone
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

Dr Ball says Both sides believe CO2 is a greenhouse gas causing warming, but disagree on the amount. Warmists claim it explains 90 percent, Skeptics an insignificant amount. Both avoid the real issue that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, as demonstrated in the book Slaying the Sky Dragon.

Posted 301 days ago.

harryanderson

So I checked it out and found that, past the headline, Dr. Ball wrote,

"Several years ago at a conference someone questioned CO2 as a greenhouse gas. A senior climate skeptic gave what I considered a political answer. He said it was foolish to say it was not a greenhouse gas. The best approach is to say the human contribution was insignificant. I disagreed, but had inadequate understanding of physics to openly challenge. "

See more at: h ttp://drtimball.co m/2012/co2-is-not-a-greenhouse-gas-that-raises-global-temperature-period/#sthash.F2DbxbY5.dpuf

Dr. Ball admits that his "inadequate knowledge of physics" keeps limits him.

And that is to be expected, since Dr. Ball is a retired geography teacher, and not a climate scientist.

So I still don't know any scientist who disputes that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

Myth, the problem is NOT with the politicians really, its with us. If we don't hold them accountable and practice opposition politics we are at fault. When people realize they can vote themselves STUFF at the expense of others, well we are truly skrewed.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

Can you copy and paste it into your search bar>?

Posted 301 days ago.

harryanderson

"CO2 is not a Greenhouse Gas that Raises Global temperature. Period! by Dr. Tim Ball"

I'd lime to check that statement out. Did it come from you? If not, would you care to name your source?

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

That really is the case for a smaller federal Govt, we have far more control of or city county and state govts then we ever will the behemoth in Washington. Liberal socialists don't much like that idea I realize.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

I am quite convinced that Republicans are not much different than Democrats these days but if it serves any purpose, it will be to show that they CAN be voted out of sweet chairmanships and committee positions.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

I guess I am guilty too, Tuesday I will pull a straight REP ticket, something I don't normally do, but I want to send a message as useless as it might be.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

We practice OPPPOSITION POLITICS these days, just look at the adds. No one is voting FOR anything or anyone rather they are voting against something or someone. Few if any political adds focus on the candidate that pays for them, cue the scary music, MYTHRAVERE is a bad guy, he kicks cats and doesn't rewind video tapes.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

Its convenient to disparage those that you disagree with as cultural warriors etc and those on your side as wise and altruistic.

But anyway, glad you have your opinion, and thanks again for sharing.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

CO2 is not a Greenhouse Gas that Raises Global temperature. Period! by Dr. Tim Ball

There you go now you KNOW ONE that says so

Posted 301 days ago.

harryanderson

Yes, I'm convinced that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, since I know of no climate scientist who denies it.

The only ones I know of who deny it are politicians and cultural warriors, but I don't value their their opinions on science very highly.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

OK Harry, we will jot you down as one who IS convinced, thanks for your opinion

Posted 301 days ago.

harryanderson

"There seems to be a connection between warmer cycles and CO2 but I am not convinced is there is a cause and effect."

Every climate scientist I know of agrees there is a cause and effect relationship. Even those who disagree with the majority position--like Judith Curry and Richard Lindzen--agree the atmospheric CO2 traps heat. They disagree on the magnitude of the effect, not that an effect exists.

Posted 301 days ago.

harryanderson

Sure we need a mature, responsible electorate. We need voters who are inoculated against power-mad propagandists who try to make every issue into a political and cultural war.

Look at climate science. Cultural polarization keeps people from agreeing on a basic fact: one I have never seen an actual climate scientist dispute.

It's mad, and it's destroying our country. If we don't come to our senses, we're headed for another civil war.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

There seems to be a connection between warmer cycles and CO2 but I am not convinced is there is a cause and effect.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

I can say this about co2, it's a natural trace gas that is essential to life on earth.

Posted 301 days ago.

Stillhere

Myth I dont think that's a good idea, shall we put the head of Exxon in charge of the dept of energy? What we need is a mature responsible electorate that knows more about the constitution than the Kardashians.

Posted 301 days ago.

harryanderson

So, Stillhere, do you agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that prevents heat from escaping a system like the earth?

Posted 301 days ago.

mythravere

If I had my way people would be "elected" on merit and qualifications alone with special attention paid to possible conflicts of interest that they might bring into play if they were given a position in government.

Like having former members of the large financial institutions running the government department that oversees said institutions.

I can't really do justice to what I have in mind on here. It would take pages of posts to layout what I am thinking.

Posted 301 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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