superstriper

does mr trump believe in global warming ?

83 posts in this topic

Ok- attack the accuracy of "97%". Whatever makes you feel better. Show me the reputable scientists or scientific organizations that dispute CO2 influence on global warming. Why the need to dispute this? Why not look at leading the revolution in wind, solar, nuclear etc. seems like we just gave China the opportunity to cement its current leadership in these fields.

So after all that hot air (pun intended), turns out you were just making a political commerical....LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's 10 to start with.  Mark Levin has a running list of thousands of others.

 

The fraudulent MMGC movement is playing out the stoppage time and they are losing (soccer reference there for the Euro -weenies).

 

From Freedom Articles:

 

10 Prominent Scientists Refuting AGW (Manmade Global Warming) with Solid Research
manmade-global-warming-hoax-myth-scam-30

Many scientists refute AGW (manmade global warming) with solid facts, data and research. Some even show evidence of global cooling.

There are an abundance of scientists refuting the idea of Manmade Global Warming

or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) with some very solid research. Representatives from almost 200 countries met last month at COP 21 (the Paris Climate Change Conference) to push forward the New World Order agenda of a World Court and a worldwide carbon tax, but fortunately for freedom lovers the final agreement which was signed lacked enforceability. However, you can be sure they will be back to try again. The fearmongering around manmade global warming is a favorite trick of the manipulators, who long ago hijacked the environmental movement. The manmade global warming movement is riddled with corruption, having been exposed numerous times for fudging the data and cooking the books, notably in the Climategate scandal of the leaked East Anglia University emails. The science is far from settled. There are a plethora of scientists and researchers all over the world opposed to the notion of AGW, including the 1000+ dissenting scientists who signed the Climate Depot report, and the 31000+ who signed the OISM Global Warming Petition.

Below is a small sampling of well-known and respected scientists who explain why manmade global warming is a fallacy with a very political agenda – to bring in the One World Government. Even mainstream politicians acknowledge it; for example, Maurice Newman, chairman of former Australian PM Tony Abbott’s business advisory council, stated that “The real agenda is concentrated political authority. Global warming is the hook [to create] a New World Order.” AGW is about controlling you, not the climate. Climate has been the master excuse for decades now, ever since the idea was hatched and exposed in documents like Report from Iron Mountain in 1966, The Club of Rome’s The First Global Revolution? in 1991, and by the Rothschilds and Rockefellers at the 4th World Wilderness Congress in 1987.

Here’s what these 10 people have to say about AGW:

manmade-global-warming-david-evans-300x2

As Dr. David Evans reveals, the manmade global warming agenda is about politics and power.

Scientist #1 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Dr. David Evans

Dr. David Evans used to work for the Australian Greenhouse Office (the main modeler of carbon in Australia’s biosphere) from 1999 to 2005. He has 6 degrees, including a PhD from Stanford in electrical engineering. Evans believes that CO2 has been causing global warming over the last century, but investigates the question: how much global warming does CO2 cause? In 2012, Evans pointed out how the IPCC (the very political Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) models were flawed. These models are based on data sourced by NASA and Argo satellites, and assume that CO2 is the only warming agent. They fail to take into consideration other warming agents. He shows how the models, both for air and water, have consistently over-estimated, predicting warming that never happened.

Evans shows data from Envisat (European satellites) which reveal how the sea level is rising 0.33 mm per year (3.3 cm per century), far below what the IPCC predicts (26-59 cm per century) and fearmonger Al Gore predicted (20 feet per century!). Evans compares the models vs. reality, and concludes:

“The climate model’s understanding of the atmosphere is incompatible with the data … the data is being suppressed … this is not about science and truth, it’s about power and politics.”

“The Copenhagen Treaty that was almost signed in 2009 would have created a worldwide bureaucracy that could override, tax, and fine national governments. This was a narrowly-averted silent coup, with clearly flawed climate “science” just an excuse … (we still face) the threat of a bureaucratic coup using climate as an excuse.”

manmade-global-warming-gravy-train-300x2

Money train: the manmade global warming or AGW movement is a gravy train.

Scientist #2 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Dr. Denis Rancourt

Dr. Denis Rancourt believes that the idea that global warming, on its own, could negatively impart the environment, is tenuous at best. He describes manmade global warming as a psychological and social phenomenon backed by no solid scientific evidence. The problem is that the AGW movement has become a giant gravy train (estimated to be worth anywhere between $22 billion to $1.5 trillion per year). It’s hard for scientists and politicians alike to get off such a comfortable and profitable moving vehicle, since their prestige, reputations and salaries all depend on it. He reveals how real activists understand that the AGW is not true activism, but rather an invention of the privileged world:

“NGOs and environmental groups who agree to buy into the global warming thing benefit from it a lot, in the sense that the powerful interests … fund them.

They have to pretend they are doing important research without ever criticizing powerful interests.

They look for comfortable lies … they look for elusive, sanitized things like acid rain, global warming … it helps to neutralize any kind of dissent … if you’re really concerned about saving the forest, habitat destruction and so on, then fight against habitat destruction; don’t go off into this tenuous thing about CO2 concentration …”

hijacked-environmental-movement-carbon-d

If only the hijacked environmental movement could see the obvious: carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a poison.

Scientist #3 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Freeman Dyson

The 91-year-old mathematical physicist and scientist at Princeton University, Freeman Dyson, started studying the effects of carbon dioxide on vegetation 37 years ago! His work has shown how the increase in CO2 has been overall very beneficial for the Earth:

“There are huge non-climate effects of carbon dioxide which are highly favorable … The whole Earth is growing greener as a result of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, so it’s increasing agricultural yields, forests and all kinds of growth in the biological world – and that’s more important and more certain than the effects on climate.

It’s enormously important for food production … “

manmade-global-warming-judith-curry-grou

Dr. Judith Curry fell into groupthink on the topic of manmade global warming.

Scientist #4 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Dr. Judith Curry

Dr. Judith Curry is Professor and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She used to be on board with the AGW agenda, but after the November 2009 ClimateGate email scandal, she changed her mind. She saw a lot of sausage-making and bullying” was needed to build a consensus. She realized she had fallen into groupthink, based on second-order evidence: the (mere) assertion that a consensus existed. She was subsequently labeled a climate heretic. This is interesting, and suggests parallels between the religious fanaticism of the manmade global warming movement and the Inquisition – which persecuted and killed those who thought differently. Many have said that AGW is a religion. In her testimony Curry states:

“No one questions that surface temperatures have increased since 1880 … however there is considerable uncertainty and 
disagreement about the most consequential issues: 
whether the warming has been dominated by human causes vs. natural variability, how much the planet will warm in the 21st century, and whether the warming is dangerous.

We have been misled in our quest to understand climate change by not paying sufficient attention to natural causes of climate variability, in particular to the sun and from the long term oscillations and ocean circulations. 
How, then, and why, have climate scientists come to a consensus about a very complex scientific problem, that the
 scientists
 themselves acknowledge has substantial and fundamental uncertainties? Climate scientists have become entangled in an acrimonious political debate …”

carbon-dioxide-CO2-300x200.jpg

Carbon dioxide – not the enemy! (CO2 is the basis of the manmade global warming myth)

Scientist #5 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Professor & Nobel Laureate in Physics Ivar Giaever

Professor Ivar Giaever, the 1973 Nobel Prizewinner for Physics, talks about how manmade global warming has become the new religion which cannot be challenged. He likens CO2 fearmongering to the story of the Emperor’s new clothes. The purported 97% consensus and the hockey stick graphs are both utterly fake. He states that:

“Global Warming is pseudoscience … from 1880 to 2013 the temperature has increased from ~288K to 288.8K (0.3%) … the temperature has been amazingly stable.

Is it possible that all the paved roads and cut down forests are the cause of “global warming”, not the CO2?

CO2 is not pollution.”

Giaever also mentions the solution proposed by Steven Chu, former US Energy Secretary and 1997 Nobel Prize winder in Physics. Chu suggested painting all roof tops white – which would help reflect sunlight and lower warming, if in fact global warming is occurring.

global-cooling-don-easterbrook-300x200.j

Dr. Don Easterbrook shows copious evidence to refute manmade global warming, by demonstrating that global cooling is in effect.

Scientist #6 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Dr. Don Easterbrook

While the above 5 scientists believe there is some kind of global warming occurring (manmade or not), the following 5 scientists refute AGW by claiming the world is undergoing global coolingDr. Don Easterbrook (in his presentation of 2013), Professor Emeritus of Geology at Western Washington University, exposes how the data has been tampered with (by NASA, NOAA and the National Science Foundation). He points out that:

– all high temperature records were set in 1930s before the rise of CO2;

– global cooling has been in effect since 1998, according to ground and satellite measurements;

– both the Arctic and Antarctic ice sheets are growing;

– CO2 is incapable of causing global warming (given that it constitutes 38/1000th of 1 percent of atmospheric gases);

– there is no correlation between CO2 and temperature;

– CO2 follows temperature rather than preceding or causing it;

– the sea level is rising (Seattle in specific) and falling (US Pacific Northwest in general) depending on where you are, and that the sea is rising at a very slow and constant rate;

– extreme weather (such as hurricanes) has not increased;

– snowfall has increased across the US; and

– that the oceans are still very alkaline (pH 8.2) not acidic.

max-planck-quote-scientific-truth-300x14   Scientist #7 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Meteorologist & Physicist Piers Corbyn

Meteorologist and physicist Piers Corbyn, brother of UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, claims the world is cooling. He states outright that “there is no such thing as manmade climate change. He also states that “the truth is the IPCC of the UN is a political not a scientific body, and it even amends scientific documents before publication to conform to diplomatic niceties.” The scientists are politically appointed to the IPCC. Corbyn explains that “science” as we think of it gets so entrenched in its current thinking that it’s often difficult for new theories or more accurate explanations to break through the status quo. As esteemed scientist Max Planck once said:

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

manmade-global-warming-scam-bob-carter-3

This Aussie cartoon depicts how the manmade global warming scam works all over the world. Credit: Steve Hunter.

  Scientist #8 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Professor and Geologist Bob Carter

Former Professor and marine geologist Bob Carter points out that 280 ppm (parts per million) of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, or even 390 or 560 ppm, is suboptimal for plant growth. There could be way higher levels and it still wouldn’t be anything like “dangerous”! In this presentation on climate change, he exposes how kids are being trained to spy on their parent’s energy usage and become “climate cops”, and how the UN predicted 50 million “climate refugees” by 2010 (whoops!!). Interestingly, although he is Australian, Carter quotes the former US President Eisenhower in his famous farewell speech to show how Government money corrupts honest science and free, critical thinking:

“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades. In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity … the prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”

That is exactly what has happened now around the world – Government in general has become too big and is interfering too much in many things, including its paid-for “science”, so mainstream research has lost its independence and credibility.

global-cooling-john-casey-300x200.jpg

John Casey provides evidence of sun-driven global cooling, and shows that manmade global warming is nonsense.

Scientist #9 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Engineer & Former White House Advisor John Casey

John Casey is a former White House national space policy advisor, NASA headquarters consultant, space shuttle engineer and author. He wrote the book Cold Sun which contains his research into global cooling. Casey investigated solar activity and concluded that we are now in a solar cycle or phase which could will lead to global cooling, not global warming, for the next 30 years to come. He claims this new cold climate will have a severe and dangerous affect on the world. In Cold Sun he provides evidence for the following:

– the end of global warming;

– the beginning of a “solar hibernation”;

– a historic reduction in the energy output of the Sun;

– a long-term drop in the Earth’s temperatures;

– the start of the next climate change to decades of dangerously cold weather; and much more.

Casey experienced firsthand in the White House how the US Government fired anyone not toeing the line with AGW propaganda – and has the power easily destroy the career and livelihood of any contractor (scientist) who dissented.

manmade-global-warming-john-coleman-300x

John Coleman’s public memo or “Cease and Desist” Notice on manmade global warming. It would be funny if the situation weren’t embezzlement on a grand scale …

Scientist #10 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Meteorologist John Coleman

Meteorologist John Coleman has studied the facts about global warming and asserts that the data shows we are not undergoing global warming, manmade or not. He reveals how a great scientist named Roger Revelle happened to have Al Gore in his class at Harvard – and thus the Global Warming campaign was born. Revelle tried to calm things down years later, but Gore went on to become Vice President, make a documentary, win an Oscar and win the Nobel Peace Prize. Gore said Revelle was senile and refused to debate him. Coleman shows how tax dollars are perpetuating the manmade global warming alarmist campaign despite the hard evidence.

climatology-al-gore-300x267.jpg

Al Gore, champion of the manmade global warming agenda at the (satirical) Church of Climatology! Credit: David Dees.

Conclusion: The Science is FAR from Settled

This list of 10 is a tiny sample – and also noteworthy in that almost none of the above have been shown to be bought off by Big Oil, a charge often aimed at so-called climate deniers. All of the above scientists appear to be acting from a pure motive of telling the truth for truth’s sake. In actuality, there are thousands of qualified scientists all over the world opposing AGW. A few more that didn’t make the list were Piers Forster (Climate Change Professor, Leeds University) who said:

“Global surface temperatures have not risen in 15 years. They make the high estimates unlikely.”

and Dr. David Whitehouse (Global Warming Policy Foundation) who stated:

“This changes everything. Global warming should no longer be the main determinant of economic or energy policy.”

How much longer before humanity wakes up to the manmade global warming hoax?

manmade-global-warming-geoengineering-30

If there is manmade global warming, it’s caused by one thing: geoengineering. A crime against the Earth and every living creature on it.

Want to Help the Environment? Focus on the Elephant in the Room: Geoengineering

In conclusion, it’s important to connect all the dots and realize that if there is even such a phenomenon as manmade global warming, the main cause is unquestionably one thing: geoengineering. The spraying of toxic aerosol chemtrails (composed of oxides, nitrates and iodides of silver, aluminum, barium, strontium and other elements) is a grave crime against humanity that is still being denied by Governments all over the world.

If you care about the Earth and environment, and want to put your energy into useful activism, focus on that – not the manmade global warming scam which is an invention of the privileged world.

*****

Want the latest commentary and analysis on Conspiracy, Natural Health, Sovereignty, Consciousness and more? Sign up for free blog updates!

Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the global conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundanc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a religion to the nutters.  First it was the coming ice age which never materialized; then it was warmal globing which never materialized.  Now it is all about "Climate Change"......as if the climate is a static entity never changing and now that mankind has entered the picture, we're all going to hell.  

 

  Of COURSE it is changing!!!!  Everyone agrees to this.  AND....we "may" have a small insignificant impact in it doing so.  BUT, you people want to take BILLIONS of dollars of OUR tax money and hand it to countries that do NOT have to follow the guidelines in the pact.  That is a mental illness....

 

  Please tell me, if you are right, just how many of billions of dollars do we need to give up and where do we send it?   Just WHAT are you trying to stop?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have no impast whatsoever.

 

Man is nothing in the face of the power of this planet.  Nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a religion to the nutters.  First it was the coming ice age which never materialized; then it was warmal globing which never materialized.  Now it is all about "Climate Change"......as if the climate is a static entity never changing and now that mankind has entered the picture, we're all going to hell.  

 

  Of COURSE it is changing!!!!  Everyone agrees to this.  AND....we "may" have a small insignificant impact in it doing so.  BUT, you people want to take BILLIONS of dollars of OUR tax money and hand it to countries that do NOT have to follow the guidelines in the pact.  That is a mental illness....

 

  Please tell me, if you are right, just how many of billions of dollars do we need to give up and where do we send it?   Just WHAT are you trying to stop?

 

no better than common street-corner hucksters blabbing about the end times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The "97%" Myth  (Don't know if this is true but if it is.....)

 

Where did the 97% number come from—was there some worldwide survey of all scientists? No there was not.

 

The 97% number is based on two publications—the first by Doran and Zimmerman (2000) and a later one by Cook et al. (2013").

 

The Doran and Zimmerman paper was a University of Illinois master's thesis by Maggie Zimmerman and her thesis advisor, Peter Doran, who claimed that "97% of climate scientists agree" that global warming is caused by rising C02. They sent an Internet survey to 10,257 people working at universities and government agencies and received 3146 replies. Of these, only 5% identified themselves as "climate scientists." Only two questions were asked: (1) "When compared with pre-1800 levels, do you think that global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remain relatively constant?" and (2) "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperature?" Of the 3146 replies, Doran and Zimmerman arbitrarily selected 79 responses, of whom 77 replied "yes." They divided 77 by 79 to get 97%, which was then elevated to "97% of all scientists" by various proponents of C02. The proper number should have been 77 divided by 3146, which equals 2%.

 

The Cook et al. (2013) paper was based on counting abstracts of climate papers. The authors contended that "Among [4014] abstracts expressing a position of AGW [Anthropogenic Global Warming], 97% endorsed the consensus position humans are causing global warming." However, Legates et al. (2013*) point out that "the author's own analysis shows that only 0.5% of all 11,944 abstracts, and 1.6% of the 4014 abstracts expressing a position, endorsed anthropogenic warming as they had defined it."

From the same type of data collection algorithms and analysis that continually shows only 3% of PP interactions have to do with abortion.  The pull it out of their collective a$$es to meet the doctrine or they just flat out lie. Either way it is absolute BS.

 

BTW, there was an article a few days ago stating some 30K scientists have called BS to GW and the Paris Accord. That seems to me to be far more than the remaining 3% who disagree.

Edited by Rickman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok- attack the accuracy of "97%". Whatever makes you feel better. Show me the reputable scientists or scientific organizations that dispute CO2 influence on global warming. Why the need to dispute this? Why not look at leading the revolution in wind, solar, nuclear etc. seems like we just gave China the opportunity to cement its current leadership in these fields.

 

We probably could be 100% nuke, now, if liberals didn't march around in the 70's with stupid signs saying how nuke power would kill the planet.  You can tell she is a liberal by the hairy pits.

 

post-3146-0-33113500-1496594155.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a yes or no question -you believe it or you dont-.........

 

It ain't "yes or no" any way you look at it......

 

- Do you believe the Climate is changing?

- Do you believe the Climate is warming?

- Do you believe it is man's fault, or simply a natural cycle?

- Is it bad for man?

- Is it bad enough that we "must" address it?

- Should biggest offenders have to change first?

- Should the US pay for those who can't?

- Can the USA actually afford to pay for those that can't?

 

Answer all those yes or no questions (every single one!) and then you'll have enough of a background to discuss whether or not Trump believes it, and whether or not we should have pulled out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's interesting about what Trump believes is this- did he pull out based on an economic arguement or does he dispute climate change? There is no clarity on that at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's interesting about what Trump believes is this- did he pull out based on an economic arguement or does he dispute climate change? There is no clarity on that at all.

What is clear is that he said he'd be willing to rejoin if anyone cared to renegotiate the terms...so based on that, I'd say Trump thought we were getting jobbed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.....Why not look at leading the revolution in wind, solar, nuclear etc. seems like we just gave China the opportunity to cement its current leadership in these fields.

I keep hearing this talking point. China can manufacture anything cheaper than the US. They could yesterday and will be able to tomorrow. How did withdrawing from the Paris accord give China the opportunity to lead these industries anymore than they currently have the opportunity to lead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Killing babies is very profitable, Planed Parenthood receives a HALF A BILLION taxpayer dollars every year to murder babies, plus what individuals also pay via insurance and co-payments to have their collective babies murdered in their wombs.

 

Dems figured might as well use that successful financial model ramming the climate change hoax down our throats.

 

From the same type of data collection algorithms and analysis that continually shows only 3% of PP interactions have to do with abortion.  The pull it out of their collective a$$es to meet the doctrine or they just flat out lie. Either way it is absolute BS.

 

BTW, there was an article a few days ago stating some 30K scientists have called BS to GW and the Paris Accord. That seems to me to be far more than the remaining 3% who disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask what is so special about "leading the way?" What do you want, for people to love us?

 

Do you come out ahead by spending all your money to develop the tech?

 

Isn't it easier/cheaper/smarter to let someone else develop it, and then just use it?  Hell, steal the patents, like China, if you must, in the name of "saving the Earth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not science, it's a religion.

 

That is so arse backwards.

 

I find it exactly the same to talk to climate change *skeptics* as with anti-vax, or anti-GMO groups. All use the same types of arguments, and they're not based on science. I won't argue that point, I've seen it for way too long, it's true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is so arse backwards.

 

I find it exactly the same to talk to climate change *skeptics* as with anti-vax, or anti-GMO groups. All use the same types of arguments, and they're not based on science. I won't argue that point, I've seen it for way too long, it's true.

Please argue it - please explain to me how many of our dollars going to what country will fix what?   How much?  What country?  What do they do with our tax dollars?   Please "splain" that to me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.