|
What gets me about all this is that everyone rationalizes this BS as OK. The ends “cap and trade” justify the means “convincing people about global warming.”
As James Delingpole reveals, that polar bear image is fake. It’s been Photoshopped. Science subsequently admitted:
“The image associated with this article was selected by the editors. We did not realize that it was not an original photograph but a collage, and it was a mistake to have used it.”
Found by Jason Price.
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 5523 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Re MScott, “That you are unwilling to read the raw science does not change that fact.”
Show me the conclusive raw science on Polar bears then.
…and why aren’t you questing the alarmist statements regarding climate change in the mid west or the excessive money spent on skepticism? Better just to let them do their magic for you?
I’m happy to see climate change deniers roost here and share jokes while scientists and world governments are doing something about it.
Dvorak serves a good function in keeping the riffraff out of the way.
Skeptic–well, we really STILL don’t know why he was refused attendance. Behind the sparse reporting, does he double-dip at the hors d’oeuvres? ((How can you look up a word if you can’t spell it?)) Does he spit when he talks? Has he presented enough times all ready as to be boringly repetitious and already refuted? Does he pass around Polar Bear Porn?
In short, does he emBEARass himself and the august proceedings?
Much more needs to be known before conclusions are drawn.
I decided to google (Dr Mitchell Taylor) to find his original research/published articles. Nothing pops up immediately and then I found this blog entry:
“Pete, who is Mitch Taylor? Usually I read what you’ve posted and then look for independent verification and credentials on the web…but I cannot confirm who this guy is exactly. He is nowhere to be found on the Government of Nunavut’s various websites; his email (which I got off one of the other web-postings) was returned invalid; I emailed the director of Nunavut’s media services and am waiting to hear back; otherwise this guy does not seem to exist except on alarmist blogs which post this article and another article on Taylor one which claims that he was banned from some mysterious climate warming meeting by evil alarmists.
Are you 100% sure this guy is even real? I will post back if I find anything.”
http://petesplace-peter.blogspot.com/2007/09/truth-about-polar-bears-vs-global.html
So, I think I’ll stop looking. Sure did look good up front though. I’ll bet even you and I could write articles debunking gravity. Why are denier articles published without a thorough review of the author’s credentials and LINKS to his 30 year studies (with footnotes)?
Poor Skeptic. Confusing political and media self interest with science.
Skeptic–again, thanks. Good link. With over 50 scientific publications, you’d think one would show up on google? I guess their spiders don’t crawl over scientific publications?
Still, I don’t like other people drawing my conclusions. He talks out of both sides of his mouth. Count the number of weasels here: “Polar bears, as a species, do not appear to be threatened or in decline based on the data that I’ve seen at the present time, although some populations do seem to be experiencing deleterious effects from climate change.”
I say give me numbers charted over time or STFU. But thats our Lame Stream Media for ya.
As I said, or at least intimated==the number and LOCATION of Polar Bears going up or down may be consistent with or inconsistent with GW and says nothing at all about AGW.
Another red herring. At worst==an irrelevant tempest in a tea pot.
Second thought: yes, I think the why’s and wherefore’s of a qualified researcher being barred from participation on an IPCC sub-committee DIRECTLY RELATED to this guy’s expertise needs to be better explained than what we’ve seen so far.
But as Tristan just said in response to the question of who killed him “Its in the Past.” (Movie: Tristan and Isolde. Pure crap)
So Skeptic, I don’t recall asking or seeing your view on: Are we in GW and its just the Anthro you are quibbling about, or does it go epistemologically deeper in some manner than would be informative?
Skeptic–good work is appreciated where ever it gets posted. Might be “missed” when posted to the wrong thread, but no harm, no foul.
So, going to your “skepticism” how does the media hysteria falsely linking a decline in Polar Bears affect your evaluation of all the other predictive models?
I admit I don’t spend a lot of time on issues I don’t think are core to the main idea. Here, the issue is can we dump trillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere for centuries and expect what from the process?
No 100% guaranteed answers, only best guesses. The best guess is that over a long time there will be ocean acidification, increased atmospheric and oceanic temperature rise, decreased ice, increased drought, rise in ocean levels, shifts in weather patterns including rainfall and droughts, increased tropical diseases, alteration of deep ocean currents===all kinds of stuff.
But, its all “wrong” because polar bears on covers of magazines sell more copy?
Is that the basis of your skepticism bunky?
When you find errors on both sides of an analysis, where do you draw your skepticism???
Bobbo, re: So, going to your “skepticism” how does the media hysteria falsely linking a decline in Polar Bears affect your evaluation of all the other predictive models?
It adds to my dismay of course, because Dr. Taylor is far from the only one this has happened to.
The warming earth is still speculative according to a recent paper on upper atmospheric water vapor… a 10% decline, which has speculated to be responsible for cooling the earth these past 10 years. How long will that last? Will it offset CO2 emissions? Is it a result of CO2 emissions? Those are just a few of the unanswered questions.
As for your list of catastrophes, you can list off all the bad things that might happen, and I could easily list all the good things. None of them are relevant at this point because the science is not settled by any stretch.
I’ve really run out of steam Bobbo. Perhaps, another day I’ll talk with you about radiative forcing. G’night.
Oh, heres a list of Dr. Taylor’s papers on Google Scholar.
http://bit.ly/aFrNlQ
Here’s another important angle to this that I think needs to get pointed out.
The White House Elena Kagan Infomercial. Free Press?! Har…
The Facts just don’t matter anymore. But anyone even thinks about lording it over make no mistake you can thank Fox News for destroying the free press in the First Amendment.
BFD
#15 Better take another look at were the money is coming from.. Exxon total spending 22 million to study if AGW is true in the last 15 years.US alone and counting 79 BILLION in the last 10 years.. Canada 10 BILLION in the last 15 years.
Amazing how them Echocondriacs can make arm waving statements like ” the science is Solid” .. what science? give an example.. one not 10! They have been indoctrinated and have lost the power of thinking or to ask questions.Instead they have been trained to react to emotional science and regurgitate what they have been told.once in a while they get brave and come on a web site to type words like ” Deniers” and run to hide in a dark closet giggling while sucking their thumbs.
How the heck did I get such a bad reputation, not right wing, left wing, or idiot follower of any other dogma be it religous or scientific. Labels, a common tool for the mediocre mind.
You better believe we’re heading to an extinction level event, at least if you have the intention of surviving it. I’ve made preparations, maybe me and my family will have a chance.
In the face of so much serious stuff that’s going on right now, this global warming BS is trivial at best.
How many millions of barrels of oil can spill into the sea before the consequences are felt beyond the US and Mexico?
How long can false capitalism survive, when almost all small investors have lost confidence.
What does the recent increase in geological activity mean, is it related to the earth’s electromagnetic field, will the sun’s solar max in 2012 have an impact?
Rapture, rupture, whatever. It’s like Emilio Estevez says in Maximum Overdrive – ‘Jesus is coming, and he is pissed!’ Or maybe Hari Seldon was right and we’re all doomed puppets in the hands of psychohistory. Who cares, the important thing is to be aware of the increased level of danger to us all.
#31 – Skeptic of something or other,
Show me the conclusive raw science on Polar bears then.
I’m not sure why the obsession with polar bears in particular. It would be catastrophic for polar bears and those of us who love them to lose this unique and beautiful species. But, I don’t think they’re quite the keystone species that pteropods are, for example. Anyway, you asked, so here are a couple of articles. I don’t know how conclusive studies are at present at showing current decline in population. That they are dependent on sea ice, however, is abundantly obvious to anyone who knows anything about the species.
http://tinyurl.com/27khcbb
http://tinyurl.com/2dvhcy4
…and why aren’t you questing [sic] the alarmist statements regarding climate change in the mid west or the excessive money spent on skepticism? Better just to let them do their magic for you?
?en ingles por favor?
I have no idea what you’re trying to say in this paragraph. My quest is for the survival of a great many species I find far more beautiful than our own and upon which we depend for our very lives. Though is seems that many refuse to believe it and think that we can purify water and air and create top soil all by ourselves, among the many other services that a functioning biosphere provides.
This news is so old, it’s as old as many of us here, including John C D. THIS photograph is fake, has been known but that does NOT mean tons of other photos showing stupid polar bears in dire situations is. It is ONE chosen photo taken to represent what is going on. Yes, I would prefer it not be fake but that’s like telling Marketing and Sales to go screw itself and having they screw you instead.
As I’ve said in the past, the stupid polar bears should move more inland and change their diet to human, preferably human babies. They’re too stupid, that’s all. If your area has been fished out, follow the boats and take revenge!
🙂
I realize I’m late to this party. Very interesting conversation. Personally, I don’t think we are scientifically advanced enough to know for certain whether we are experiencing GW that is unusual to what has happened over the history of this planet, and whether or not it is man made, since we’ve only been around or such a small amount of time.
What I do know for certain is you can’t trust politicians. And they are the ones who will be passing laws on cap and trade. They will tax companies for doing something that may or may not be occurring. That extra expense will be passed on down to the consumer. And politicians will get richer and have more control over our lives. I also wonder, how much does the US military contribute to emissions?