If you are angry with big oil, and agree that big corporations are fucking the regular people over, by burying technologies that could be helping us, like Chevron purchasing and burying the lithium battery technology used for the EV-1 way back, as just one easy example... then you are singing to the choir on this. We are in complete agreement.

No the oil companies are behind the global warming movement. If you can be in on taxing the World you could give a shit less about selling oil. "Beyond Patroleum." Back in 1913 when they were trying to pass the Federal Reserve Act the bankers launched a campaign against it. The people thought that since the bankers didn't want it it was a good thing. Well little did they know it was a trick. Reverse psychology.

So since we agree that companies such as BP doesn't want us to advance and have been hiding tech for many years. Would it at all surprise you that they would blow up an oil well and hamper the cleanup efforts making it worse to further an agenda which they have more or less their company's future riding on?

No, that doesn't make any sense at all.

I believe the 911 conspiracies are 100 x's more likely, than BP destroying their company intentionally.

ah OK, this post is Kirk approved :thumbsup

http://freeprivaterooms.com/kirk.gif

If they can't get the carbon credit scam sold their company is destroyed. They and their cohorts are holding shitloads of carbon credit derivatives. Obama, Goldman Sachs, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, the Queen on England and the whole gang would all be broke...

You are either a delusional lunatic, or an inspired soothsayer.

Let's see where the facts lead us on this one...

The facts are that all of those people are heavily invested in this "global warming" scam.

For example

Burmah Oil, one of Britain’s oldest companies, had once effectively owned the company that became BP, before selling its majority holding to the British government at the start of World War I.

http://www.bp.com/printsectiongeneri...tentId=7027816

Scandal: Obama, Gore, Goldman, Joyce Foundation CCX partners to fleece USA
http://www.examiner.com/x-14143-Oran...-to-fleece-USA

Hate that the above quotes Glenn Beck but anyway.. It's all facts.

yes, I can see this is a really serious article

see if you can spot the difference:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/50/14...dc94d59460.jpg

http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/826...0AA4DCD10D7C9C

Pretty sure this is a lucky coincidence where it appears like NO CO2 EMISSION=NO POLLUTION when in fact the second photo must be taken in a place where 75% of natural CO2 emission isn't happening because they're breaking the laws of physics and chemistry

Where is the Iraqi Minister or Propaganda when you need it? :Oh crap




































































































aaaah, here he is :thumbsup :
http://www.pikeynet.com/myloftextens...5/minister.jpg

Which is why I just report the fact of the measurements, and dont take the obviously speculative step of saying it proves anything.

Science doesn't work like politics.

And the climate system of the planet is too complex to be modeled with the kinds of slogans and is-of-identity statements that politics relies on to manipulate the human brain.

---

The ice link you posted is standard political tripe. That's not how science works. You need to keep examining the new measurements and learn how to model a complex trend over time.

We had a colder than average winter on some parts of the globe last year - and colder than average winters ARE ALSO PREDICTED as part of the global warming model.

But the ice that reformed last winter was thin, and has remelted again at a rate never before measured by humans so far this year.

Your politics can never work like science. In order to understand global warming theory you need to learn how to use the scientific method and understand the scientific process.

Science doesn't care what you believe. Its about measurements. Yes, it's done by humans and therefore has human failings, but it is not in the same case of human activities as politics.

Politics is about beliefs and the art of the possible, science is about measurements and shared criticism of models.

btw, this is made by NASA, those motherfucking scammers

but well, since they faked a moon landing, I'm sure they're faking global warming as well

http://blog.areeba.com.au/wp-content...03/tinfoil.jpg

The scientific method is false.. There is no proof of manmade CO2 is causing global warming, just claims that it "may" be happening based on falsified evidence. All done in order to fund a political agenda.. They were not allowing "shared criticism.." Remember, Al Gore said the science was settled years ago..

The only way anyone can make such a silly claim is if they have never even looked at the process by which these kinds of models are peer-reviewed and criticized.

Your sources are all corrupted by the rightwing and the fossil carbon corporations.

Seriously, you need to at least try to look at the actual science itself.

Now, I fully understand that you yourself are so profoundly uninterested in challenging yourself to actually study the science that it's a complete waste of time to expect you to actually look for yourself.

The same holds true for most right wingers and right-wing "independents", sadly.

But, you are, in your statement above, mistaken.

A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.

Read more from Christopher Booker
This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.
So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.

The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs - run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the notorious "hockey stick" graph - GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new "hotspot" in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year.




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...zing-heat.html

The 'scientific method' is neither false nor true - it is a methodology, not an answer.

By definition the scientific method can never produce a true or false "answer". That's not how it works.

No, the scientific method cannot "prove" that manmade co2 is causing the global increases in average temperature. Such a proof is not possible.

If you were a climate scientists I assure you that the scientific methodology would allow your shared criticism. Study the science itself, the debate on the theory is ongoing and there is a huge amount of shared criticism going on right now.

And, as much as you might want to believe otherwise, the very strong majority opinion of the various disciplines of science that study climate is that average temperature global warming is happening, that the models predict even more climate changes and extreme weather will be coming, and that the most probable cause is human-caused changes to the atmosphere.

No, thats not "proof", it's just what the best current models suggest.

But, we are going to have to do something different to get our energy in the future anyway, because we have burned all the best fossil carbon, so wether or not human-caused climate change turns out to be the best model, we STILL have to make changes in our energy infrastucture.

1. Average-global-temperature global warming theory INCLUDES THE PREDICTION of colder than average weather too. Turbulence in the atmosphere pushes colder air and warmer air into place sit wouldn't ordinarily go, because the climate is a giant heat-engine pushing the dynamics of the oceans and atmosphere.

1. you have to stop getting your "science" from newspapers. Newspapers are political instruments, not part of the process of science. But, if you like....

(Please note that I am not claiming that a newspaper article has anything to do with science.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...mest-year-ever


========================

New data from some of the world's leading climate researchers and institutions suggest that 2010 is shaping up to be one of the warmest years ever recorded.

Scientists at the US National Snow and Ice Centre Data Centre (NSIDC) report today that Arctic sea ice ? frozen seawater that floats on the ocean surface ? is now at its lowest physical extent ever recorded for the time of year, suggesting that it is on course to break the previous record low set in 2007.

Satellite monitoring by the NSIDC in Boulder, Colorado, shows that the melting of sea ice has been unusually fast this year, with as much as 40,000 sq km now disappearing daily.

The melt season started almost a month later than normal at the end of March and is not expected to end until September.

Meanwhile, research from the polar science centre at the University of Washington suggests that the volume of sea ice in March 2010 was 20,300 cubic km, 38% below the 1979 level when records began.

Global surface temperatures may also be at a record high, according to leading climate scientist James Hansen and colleagues at the National Aeronautic Space Administration (Nasa).

In a paper which is yet to be peer-reviewed but has been submitted to the journal Reviews of Geophysics, they suggest that the Earth has been 0.65C warmer over the past 12 months than during the 1951 to 1980 mean, and that the global temperature for 2010 will exceed the 2005 record.


===================================

I blame the elephant's poo for global warming

http://controversy.wearscience.com/img450/turtle.gif


wait.... you have elephants in your avatar.... coincidence? I don't think so!!! :thumbsup

Obviously not. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Stop kneeing oil in the balls for a minute and lets talk about coal, shall we?

Globally it produces more carbon dioxide emissions than petroleum products and yet it seems to get a pass when people start jumping up and down screaming that the sky is falling and manbearpig is coming to assrape everyone on the planet in their sleep.

Quoted the truth. :2 cents:

The scientific method is false? So who do we have to thank for 300+ years of scientific progress? Not Newton, Darwin, Pasteur, Einstein, Crick & Watson, et al?

Getting scientific "facts" from a website run by political hacks is like checking eBay to see what's on TV tonight.

You are honestly putting Al Gore, Maurice Strong and these other fuckwads in the same category as those guys? Those people had nothing to do with any of the "science" with the global warming scam. Why even bring up their names? If you read the article you find out how it all came to be and it was never about anything more than creating a tax so a small group of people to decide how to spend it and dictate our lives. Funding a World dictatorship. Then look into the "climategate" scandle where they admit they can't prove man has anything to do with temperature (that is outside of weather manipulation via cloud seeding and a few other things) They admit to blackballing anyone who said anything other than what they did. It is and was all a scam. Made up science. Made up models from falsified temperatures. Did I forget to mention they "accidentally" dumped the temperature readings where they base all of their science? After they were caught changing those readings so it would fit their "model." So how could anyone ever check their "model" and/or method.. Opps you can't. Science is settled.

All global warming believers.. It's time for bed..

Japanese told to go to bed an hour early to cut carbon emissions
Japanese households are being urged to go to bed one hour earlier than normal in order to help tackle climate change.

Danielle Demetriou in Tokyo
Published: 12:38PM BST 24 Jun 2010

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/env...emissions.html

BTW my mom has had solar panels on her house since Al Gore was inventing the internet. Only back then it was a global cooling scare.

Night, night..

No, I wasn't doing that, I was just taking issue with your statement, "The scientific method is false". The only reason you imagine I was putting Al Gore, et al in the same category as Newton, et al, is because you're unable to parse and comprehend a simple sentence.

I can't help wondering if your attitude of aggressive stupidity is a boon or a bane.

I believe you're the one confused. The global warming model, method and science. The whole shebang is false, made up, fabricated, make believe.. I did not say all scientifc models and methods in general....

Coal sucks too, I agree.

If solar was properly funded and mandated, it could provide a good amount of our electricity, which would be a big step towards weening us off coal.

More Scams:

http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html

Not only will you be taxed for living you will be placed in a "tenable settlement"


06/23/2010 by James Handley


On Monday, Dr. Laurie Geller, director of the National Academy of Sciences’ new blue-ribbon climate change report, briefed the Citizens’ Climate Lobby’s National Conference, kicking off CCL’s Washington lobby week. Part I of NAS’s report stresses the strong evidence and broad scientific consensus that Earth’s surface is warming due to human-caused fossil fuel burning. NAS recommends further research on managing impacts on ecosystems, food production, public health and climate policy.

Part II, “Limiting the Magnitude of Future Climate Change” calls for immediate, urgent action; its top recommendation is to “Adopt an economy-wide carbon pricing system.” It also urges additional clean energy R&D, research into how behavior and technology interact and incentives for low greenhouse gas energy technologies. Part III, on adaptation, suggests responses to the inevitable consequences of climate change already in motion

Recommendations include: “develop hot weather early warning systems” as Philadelphia has done, and “Alaska: Retreat from the Coast” beginning the process of relocation from areas where thawing and erosion are rendering present settlements untenable.


http://www.carbontax.org/blogarchive...-carbon-price/

How ya like that slaves?

There is no denying abundant available energy, we just need to understand how to tap in to it efficiently.

The biggest failure of solar (in a non-heat scenario) is that the panels require constant cleaning, because the drop in electricity they produce compounds quickly with very little dirt obscuring the direct sunlight. The heat farm projects I've read about are much more realistic because they heat a fluid to drive turbines.

Wind energy is very available, especially on large buildings. At least one side is going to have a steady source of airflow. I've seen some 'barrel' type concept devices for mounting on a building's surface to harness this wasted energy, but not really seen much forward movement with it. Very unfortunate...