Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)

[gadgetmac]

dickymint said:

Union Of Concerned Scientists

We Need Your Support
to Make Change Happen
We can reduce global warming emissions and ensure communities have the resources they need to withstand the effects of climate change—but not without you. Your generous support helps develop science-based solutions for a healthy, safe, and sustainable future.


$25

$50

$100

$250

$1000

Other
Donate

Get you wallets out suckers

At least its for a good cause, meanwhile your favourite/only source for quotes does similar but without mentioning any good whatsoever to come from it

Make a Monthly Donation

Monthly giving is the easiest and most efficient way to support us. You are in total control. You can easily start, change or stop your gift at any time online or by phone.
You’ll receive less mail because we don’t need to send you reminders — which means more of your gift goes directly to support us.

You’ll receive uninterrupted membership benefits, ensuring you never miss an issue of our popular QPR-Quarterly Performance Report.

Stock
Gift of Stock
Avoid capital gains taxes by giving appreciated stock to The Heartland Institute.
Make a gift of securities


Planned Giving
If preserving and expanding individual freedom for future generations is important to you – and if you want to be remembered for your commitment to liberty – consider making a special gift to The Heartland Institute for our “Legacy of Freedom” campaign.
Give through your will (bequest)
Honor a family member or friend
Create a lasting legacy
Contribute to Heartland’s Endowment Fund

Mail Your Donation
Yes! I want ensure that freedom rises during my watch. Please fax this form to 312/377-4122 or mail it to The Heartland Institute, 3939 North Wilke Road, Arlington Heights, Illinois 60004. For faster service, call 312/377-4000 and ask for Gwendalyn Carver.


Start rewriting those wills and getting your share certificates out you old curmudgeons.

“Honour a family member or friend”

[Jasandjules]

Just to check, are the AGW proponents suggesting that Govts do not lie? And would not lie?

[mondeoman]

LoonyTunes said:

I feel the need to update my list lest anyone should think it's come to an end

1. The Royal Society
2. NASA
3. The National Center for Atmospheric Research
4. Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
5. International Research Institute for Climate and Society
6. University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
7. Academies des Sciences, France
8. American Geophysical Union
9. American Association for the Advancement of Science
10. The British Antarctic Survey
11. American Chemical Society
12. American Meteorological Society
13. U.S. Global Change Research Program
14. American Physical Society
15. American Association Of State Climatologists

Ah yes, the AMS, who cant get the data to support their stance on AGW.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/BAMS-D-17...

Abstract
Continental United States (CONUS) hurricane-related inflation-adjusted damage has increased significantly since 1900. However, since 1900 neither observed CONUS landfalling hurricane frequency nor intensity shows significant trends, including the devastating 2017 season.

Two large-scale climate modes that have been noted in prior research to significantly impact CONUS landfalling hurricane activity are El Niño–Southern Oscillation on interannual time scales and the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation on multidecadal time scales. La Niña seasons tend to be characterized by more CONUS hurricane landfalls than El Niño seasons, and positive Atlantic multidecadal oscillation phases tend to have more CONUS hurricane landfalls than negative phases.

Growth in coastal population and regional wealth are the overwhelming drivers of observed increases in hurricane-related damage...

[LoonyTunes]

Jasandjules said:

Just to check, are the AGW proponents suggesting that Govts do not lie? And would not lie?

Just to check, are saying that they are ALL lying? And the scientific establishment are in on it?

[LoonyTunes]

Diderot said:

Be my guest.

By the way, are you aware of the Academie des Sciences' stated position on the 18 year pause?

I'm aware of their position on AGW. Are you?

Are you also aware that not a single National science academy disputes or denies the scientific consensus around human-caused Climate Change?

[Diderot]

LoonyTunes said:

Diderot said:

Be my guest.

By the way, are you aware of the Academie des Sciences' stated position on the 18 year pause?

I'm aware of their position on AGW. Are you?

Are you also aware that not a single National science academy disputes or denies the scientific consensus around human-caused Climate Change?

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

[gadgetmac]

Diderot said:

LoonyTunes said:

Diderot said:

Be my guest.

By the way, are you aware of the Academie des Sciences' stated position on the 18 year pause?

I'm aware of their position on AGW. Are you?

Are you also aware that not a single National science academy disputes or denies the scientific consensus around human-caused Climate Change?

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Try answering his outstanding question then I’ll answer your question as the answer is blatantly obvious.

[anonymous-user]

LoonyTunes said:

Jasandjules said:

Just to check, are the AGW proponents suggesting that Govts do not lie? And would not lie?

Just to check, are saying that they are ALL lying? And the scientific establishment are in on it?

And the media and the vast majority of scientists. All acting together for wealth redistribution and some other sinister stuff.

That’s what’s funny about the cult they all have slightly different paranoia and nutty theories.

Some are conspiracy theorists like this and if you point it out the others shout Strawman.

Some think scientists are wrong, others think they’re lying for grants.

Some think there’s no warming, others concede there is but say it doesn’t matter.

They never correct each other as they’re bonded together in this odd ideology against scientific consensus and organisations and governments and experts and young people.

[LoonyTunes]

gadgetmac said:

Try answering his outstanding question then I’ll answer your question as the answer is blatantly obvious.

He's not a 'big picture' man. He'll dispute the nitty gritty differences as if they support his position but alas they don't. No scientific research Institute of any consequence is willing to support his side of the argument but I stand to be corrected on that.

Please correct me Didi.

[anonymous-user]

Diderot said:

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Have you not noticed that even the other cult members aren’t backing you up on this.

[Diderot]

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

LoonyTunes said:

Diderot said:

Be my guest.

By the way, are you aware of the Academie des Sciences' stated position on the 18 year pause?

I'm aware of their position on AGW. Are you?

Are you also aware that not a single National science academy disputes or denies the scientific consensus around human-caused Climate Change?

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Try answering his outstanding question then I’ll answer your question as the answer is blatantly obvious.

I wasn’t talking to you.

[LoonyTunes]

El stovey said:

LoonyTunes said:

Jasandjules said:

Just to check, are the AGW proponents suggesting that Govts do not lie? And would not lie?

Just to check, are saying that they are ALL lying? And the scientific establishment are in on it?

And the media and the vast majority of scientists. All acting together for wealth redistribution and some other sinister stuff.

That’s what’s funny about the cult they all have slightly different paranoia and nutty theories.

Some are conspiracy theorists like this and if you point it out the others shout Strawman.

Some think scientists are wrong, others think they’re lying for grants.

Some think there’s no warming, others concede there is but say it doesn’t matter.

They never correct each other as they’re bonded together in this odd ideology against scientific consensus and organisations and governments and experts and young people.

I do sometimes wonder how or why i got involved in this thread.

Arguing with a bunch of fruits on the internet is not my idea of a Sunday.

I need to get out more before I become one of them.

[Diderot]

El stovey said:

Diderot said:

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Have you not noticed that even the other cult members aren’t backing you up on this.

So then you should be able to reveal the Academie des Sciences’ position on the pause. Well of course that assumes that any of have actually read it.

[LoonyTunes]

Diderot said:

El stovey said:

Diderot said:

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Have you not noticed that even the other cult members aren’t backing you up on this.

So then you should be able to reveal the Academie des Sciences’ position on the pause. Well of course that assumes that any of have actually read it.

What's their position on AGW? Have you actually read it?

That's the list. It not a list about the pause.

[Diderot]

LoonyTunes said:

Diderot said:

El stovey said:

Diderot said:

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Have you not noticed that even the other cult members aren’t backing you up on this.

So then you should be able to reveal the Academie des Sciences’ position on the pause. Well of course that assumes that any of have actually read it.

What's their position on AGW? Have you actually read it?

That’s right, keep swerving. Have you read their position on the pause? You were the one listing them, you are the one who denies the existence of the pause. Moreover I’m assuming you checked all the societies and institutions you’ve listed thus far for their position on the pause which you continue to deny?

[gadgetmac]

Diderot said:

That’s right, keep swerving. Have you read their position on the pause? You were the one listing them, you are the one who denies the existence of the pause. Moreover I’m assuming you checked all the societies and institutions you’ve listed thus far for their position on the pause which you continue to deny?

Strawman

Answer his question.

[LoonyTunes]

gadgetmac said:

Strawman

Answer his question.

He needs to play this game. Its the only one left. Argue in the margins.

[gadgetmac]

LoonyTunes said:

gadgetmac said:

Strawman

Answer his question.

He needs to play this game. Its the only one left. Argue in the margins.

Why would anyone read up on every scientific institutions position on just one aspect of AGW?

Does he think that you have to read every statement or paper published from every Government or Scientist or Science Institute or Science dept in every University?

Does he expect every single one to agree with every other one on every single thing?

The fact is that they do all appear to agree on base assumption that AGW is a fact.

It’s a question borne of desperation.

[Jasandjules]

LoonyTunes said:

Just to check, are saying that they are ALL lying? And the scientific establishment are in on it?

Not going to answer then? Probably wise.

[turbobloke]

It's not "the scientific institutions" in any case. Nobody has listed them all, who could, leaving such statements as generalisations framed to suit a purpose.

It's a case of vocal activists pushing a line with background people higher up - political animals themselves - knowing which side of the debate their bread is buttered...and tolerating it. However not everyone tolerates it, for starters there have been resignations from IPCC (hurricane specialist Dr Chris Lansdsea, and malaria specialist Dr Paul Reiter who had to threaten legal action to get his name removed from the gospel tomes) and APS (Prof Hal Lewis) as well as open letters of complaint from e.g. Royal Society Fellows and NASA staffers all rightly embarrassed by the results of politicising climate.

If somebody actually knew the title of every scientific institution which have held properly constituted polls of membership on this issue and knew the results, it would still be irrelevant. Appeal to authority (institutions) and to consensus ('the' institutions) just doubles the logical fallacy ,Safety in numbers is not science but one has to suspect that consensus fabrications give a warm fuzzy feeling for those unwilling or unable to do anything but take another's word for it, contrary to sage advice from the Royal Society: nullius in verba.

Not that this will ever stop the flow of dreck, evidence says so since pro-agw irrelevance hasn't stopped yet in spite of the looping.