The ‘Summer of Global Warming’ has crashed into an obvious wall: the sun decided it was time to hibernate. So instead of panicked hoards rushing around, yelling, ‘We are roasting to death’, we have many, many millions of people who shivered all summer complaining about too much rain and cold temperatures. Now, the debate heats up as some hackers reveal some of the inner workings of the global warming debate between scientists. I say, let’s release all the insider information and let the fur fly. This is, like all debates, quite necessary and shouldn’t have been conducted in the dark in the first place. This should be obvious to everyone.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
Like in all debates, when I put in my two bits, it pleases nobody. I pick and choose my own beliefs and regard all things economical, political or natural with a eye to being able to accurately predict the future. Not to push some agenda but to understand underlying systems sufficiently to see various forces at work. This is the opposite from trying to prove something even in the teeth of obvious facts to the contrary. So let’s look at the latest brouhaha over the discovery that global warming scientists hate anti-global warming scientists. It is rather amusing if it weren’t about some very important debates that impact on all of us:
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
Hacked E-Mail Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute – NYTimes.com
Hundreds of private e-mail messages and documents hacked from a computer server at a British university are causing a stir among global warming skeptics, who say they show that climate scientists conspired to overstate the case for a human influence on climate change….
.
The battle heats up! Of course, if the global warming advocates were to cooperate with the masses and not the elites, they would have a better time of it. Flattered by being called in to associate with the Bilderberg gang and flattered as to how the international investment bankers hugged and kissed them when climate change scientists endorsed using the Derivatives Beast to fix it (!!!!), we are now at war.
.
I know that chemical changes in our environment means huge changes all over the place. How to fix this, though or even wanting to fix this is another problem entirely and it is entirely political. And this means, we have to have a true and real consensus not a one-sided consensus. Back last spring, when we learned via leaks and people snooping on the very rich, that the rich were planning to make this the Year of Global Warming, all I had to do was go outside at sunset and look at the zenith to see the high scrim of volcanic dust.
.
I even predicted on my blog that the Northern Hemisphere would see a cold and wet summer thanks to this! And predicted, accurately as usual, that the push to get us to endorse the insane energy carbon derivatives market would fail, thank god for that! And it is failing, badly. Duh! The obvious hysteria of the people pushing us into the fatal carbon trading market scheme has alerted many people who already are not prone to trust bankers, into digging in heels over global warming. And thus, we are set on the path to another mega-confrontation that will not be based on science by EITHER side of the issue but will be mostly emotional.
.
…In one e-mail exchange, a scientist writes of using a statistical “trick” in a chart illustrating a recent sharp warming trend. In another, a scientist refers to climate skeptics as “idiots.”
.
The previous 4,000 year status quo was never very stable as we saw in the mini-ice age of the 1600’s–1700’s which seems to have been caused by the sun not producing quite as much energy as previously Galileo Galilei was the very first person to see spots on the sun but when he tried to prove this, everyone thought he was making it up because there were no sunspots…for over 100 years! And glaciers grew greatly and the climate became inclement and places that grew grape vines like in England, ceased being able to do this. Then, the sun ‘turned back on’ and the glaciers retreated.
.
Astronomers are not climatologists but are often very accurate when it comes to long-range climate predictions due to being very aware of the levels of dust in the stratosphere (it interferes with observations) and due to watching the sun, not the earth. My father produced a paper, for example, that predicted (five years ago when the sun was very active) that the sun would have a very inactive solar maximum the next cycle and sure enough, it did this. And this means colder temperatures! Obviously.
. Some skeptics asserted Friday that the correspondence revealed an effort to withhold scientific information. “This is not a smoking gun; this is a mushroom cloud,” said Patrick J. Michaels, a climatologist who has long faulted evidence pointing to human-driven warming and is criticized in the documents….
.
If nothing else, this is a lot of egg on a lot of faces. Personally, I am very happy the emails were hacked. OPENNESS MATTERS A LOT! Chatting behind our backs, these scientists plotted. This was totally wrong of them. I have sat in on quite a few scientific meetings in the past and am a persona non grata because I talk too much. That is, scientists will conspire behind closed doors. As do ALL organizations including the ‘alternative medicine’ guys, etc. THIS IS HUMAN NATURE.
.
This desire to finesse and control the conversation is common, not uncommon. It is done on ALL sides. The anti-global warming guys are JUST AS GUILTY of doing this, too. No one has hacked all of their messages with each other and I hope someone does manage to do this. One thing is certain: science flourishes best when it is the most open. I have begged scientists since my childhood, to do this. Example: many scientists connected to the nuclear bomb/missile community discussed the dangers of nuclear fall out with each other but were scared of talking in public about this. I used to listen in when very young because they thought a child would not understand what they were talking about.
.
I had battles in private with my father to come out in the public with this information which was classified as secret. He refused but he did to go Kennedy in the end and explained to him that nuclear bomb tests were going to kill many people via cancer and other health disorders. Scientists can be silent out of fear. Fear of the public going crazy (Darwin’s great book, ‘The Descent of Man’ is a prime example of this) or governments going crazy (due to a desire to continue doing something bad).
.
Global warming was NOT embraced by the ruling elites until it was connected to the Derivatives Beast. Then and only then, did it take off like a rocket. Only, the sun didn’t cooperate, did it?
. …Dr. Trenberth said Friday that he was appalled at the release of the e-mail messages. But he added that he thought the revelations might backfire against climate skeptics. He said that he thought that the messages showed “the integrity of scientists.” Still, some of the comments might lend themselves to being interpreted as sinister.
.
In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over the last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a “trick” employed by another scientist, Michael Mann, to “hide the decline” in temperatures.
.
Dr. Mann, a professor at Pennsylvania State University, confirmed in an interview that the e-mail message was real. He said the choice of words by his colleague was poor but noted that scientists often used the word “trick” to refer to a good way to solve a problem, “and not something secret.”
.
If this is true, then he better figure out better words to use when describing statistics. ‘Trick’ is a tricky word. It means, someone is pulling our legs or deceiving us. So why would scientists use this word so lightly? It is obviously totally inappropriate. Scientists are like wizards. Deeply buried inside of our brains is this concept that all science is really magic. Indeed, the philosophers and shaman of yore were attempts at being scientists. Groping for an understanding of how nature works and groping with intellectual concepts like numbers and systems, the connection between Dr. Faust and the Devil is very powerful.
.
I often talk about magic but not from the perspective of ‘magic is real’ in that ‘wishful thinking’ can control reality. Magic is where our attempts at understanding reality are then projected onto the future and when we do this, we find ourselves in the Cave of Wealth and Death. In the global warming matter, many rich people see themselves getting even richer if these wolves convince every lamb and chicken little to run into the Cave of Wealth and Death. There, the wolves will devour them!
.
The carbon FUTURES market being set up will loot all other systems totally. Wealth will flow very rapidly into the hands of the wolves who will then reduce the rest of us to poverty. Where we get to shiver in very cold winters, secure in the knowledge that there is no global warming. Eh. The scientist wizards are naive. They will not get rich off of all this. They are servants. They think they are saving us while they assist the wolves in herding us all into this Cave.
. At issue were sets of data, both employed in two studies. One data set showed long-term temperature effects on tree rings; the other, thermometer readings for the past 100 years. Through the last century, tree rings and thermometers show a consistent rise in temperature until 1960, when some tree rings, for unknown reasons, no longer show that rise, while the thermometers continue to do so until the present.
.
I remember 1960. It got warmer in Arizona, we had a big drought to the point, we literally were praying for rain. Then, Mt. Irgun in Sumatra blew up! Suddenly, it was much, much cooler. And it rained a great deal in Arizona, too! We had floods! This volcanic action meshed with the sun being relatively quiet so by 1974, everyone was talking about a New Ice Age, not global warming. One thing is certain: cooler temperatures DO cause bigger rings on trees due to increased moisture especially when this is related to volcanic activity.
. Dr. Mann explained that the reliability of the tree-ring data was called into question, so they were no longer used to track temperature fluctuations. But he said dropping the use of the tree rings was never something that was hidden, and had been in the scientific literature for more than a decade. “It sounds incriminating, but when you look at what you’re talking about, there’s nothing there,” Dr. Mann said….
.
ARRGH! When there is a divergence of data, you don’t toss out the data. You look more closely at it! This is an Iron Rule of Science. Instead of dismissing it, this is exactly where one looks for the Truth! For a decade, coinciding exactly with the birth of the concept of using carbon futures trading, did the scientists, who know who pays their universities for research (the rich) ditched this powerful evidence and decided to go ahead, WRONGLY, with the global warming model that leaves out the sun and volcanoes as major actors on the world’s climate stage.
. …At first, said Dr. Michaels, the climatologist who has faulted some of the science of the global warming consensus, his instinct was to ignore the correspondence as “just the way scientists talk.” But on Friday, he said that after reading more deeply, he felt that some exchanges reflected an effort to block the release of data for independent review.
.
Welcome to the club, Dr. Michaels. This debate about science is quite different from the anti-vaccination debates. Since the anti-vaccinationists refuse to accept ANY data proving themselves wrong, they are very much like the guys supporting the global warming model warnings. That is, they refuse to accept obvious incoming data and deal with it by tossing it out the door again. Being ‘against’ something isn’t always right. NO WAY IN HELL. Sometimes, scientists are correct in one field while being wrong in another.
.
The powerful and rich can exploit science. Duh. But again: to what ends? Vaccinations rapidly increased world populations by sparing children. Children, not the elderly, have more children if they get to grow up. So the more we prevent childhood diseases via vaccinations, the more we have productive children who have children. On the other hand, the global warming business is all about denials: the people pushing for carbon markets are not out to do charity or save children. They are out to enslave children by either taking their parent’s wealth or by freezing them to death if the sun decides it is time to shut off the black spots system and we get sudden and catastrophic cooling again.
.
I fully back Dr. Michaels in his demand that there be not only a review but scientists playing games against him and others should be punished (fired). This was just so very wrong. The issues are immense and very important and people thought they could play mind games instead of being honest and forthright. The fact that they dumped the tree ring data, for example, has always irritated the hell out of me.
.
He said some messages mused about discrediting him by challenging the veracity of his doctoral dissertation at the University of Wisconsin by claiming he knew his research was wrong. “This shows these are people willing to bend rules and go after other people’s reputations in very serious ways,” he said. Spencer R. Weart, a physicist and historian who is charting the course of research on global warming, said the hacked material would serve as “great material for historians.”
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
I have a very, very old oak tree on my property that first began growing before Columbus sailed to the New World. It is rapidly dying. When it finally dies, I will slice the trunk open using a very, very big Husky chainsaw that has a chain taller than I (this tree has tremendous girth) and I plan to examine the tree rings closely. For example, one branch of this big tree fell two years ago and I counted the rings going back to Napoleon. And there it was: the cold wet summers of the 1812-1815 showed up in a curious way. What I suspect is, the trees had lots of water but not lots of sun. Thus, the curious rings which show a sudden growth burst DURING this cold cycle.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
My own observations of nature is this: during cold wet summers like the one we just went through, the trees have a shorter growing season and less sun. But the leaves are much bigger than normal! So the trees grow more than usual even though there is less sun and shorter period of time! A cold DRY summer causes smaller rings just like a hot DRY summer. Here in the NE, when we have a very cold winter, it is also quite dry. Warm winters means lots of snow. We believe that Ice Age winters were very cold and at the same time, quite dry. It is just that the snow didn’t melt. The first years of an Ice Age (these all start off quite suddenly which is a warning sign to us), there is a lot of snow as the oceans are still warm.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
But once the Ice Age gets a grip on the systems, it gets cold and there is less rain in general since the oceans are shrinking and the moisture is locked into glaciers. Africa, for example, saw deserts expand tremendously during the start of the last great Ice Age, the one that created that odd creature called ‘humans’. The humans in Africa nearly died from this mega-drought! At the same time, North America south of the glaciers was lush and green and Arizona, for example, had tall redwoods and lots of huge fauna like giant sloths and mastodons ran around LA.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
This was due to the shape of the continent: the great ice sheets fed many, many, many rivers. So the rivers and streams flowed southwards, along the Mississippi valley, the Rio Grande valley, etc. This, in turn, fed great flora systems! Not to mention the many lakes this created! In Africa, there were very few glaciers, actually, just one small one. So there was a drought. While the North American continent saw lush growth.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
The truth is harsh: NO SYSTEM IS PERFECT. We are in a present system which is very prone to change and a sudden change, due to forces far beyond our control. The cosmic side of the global warming issue is one important aspect. And the other side is even more stark: global warming is not a total catastrophe. It just means we all have to see changes happen. One thing is certain: acid rain is terrible for all systems.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
If the anti-carbon pollution people were focused first on that, they would get more cooperation. And this would cause us to debate the utility of using coal burning plants to make energy. I am totally against using coal burning plants this way. But this calls for some finesse and the one thing people in any ideological debate are capable of, is finessing things by considering all forces at work at the same time!
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
All nature systems involve trade offs. And we have to discuss these trade offs rationally. The gaining of Greenland, Antarctica, Siberia and northern Canada as lands we can colonize and which will be very fruitful, has to be weighed against the rising oceans and the expansion of some deserts. While the reverse side of this same coin is also true: we can easily see another ice age which I believe is many times worse. Predicting the future is very difficult. And in this regard, the only prediction that is true right now is the fact that this planet sees very unstable weather complex conditions all the time ever since the Great Ice Ages began.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
Here is a rather crude map I drew up showing how the present cold regions will be high growth areas if we have global warming. Any landmasses lost to rising seas will be more than replaced by landmasses that will suddenly be useful for habitations:
We are in this cycle which is very difficult to predict and is very, very capricious. All ice ages not only started suddenly, they also ended very abruptly which leads astronomers to suspect very strongly that the sun is the chief agent in all this. If this is true, the old climate balance isn’t balanced at all. It is an ATTEMPT at balancing while a key component of the system is not balanced: the sun. Galileo was put under house arrest. He died in deep despair. All he wanted to do was to understand nature. This flew in the face of many other emotions of others: fear, greed, superstition, magical beliefs.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
We are all prey to magical thinking. We are also all prey to mono-minded thinking. I am no exception. But then, there ARE NO EXCEPTIONS to this! This is why science always morphs and changes: we have debates that rage long and hard and this is very good. When debates are shut down, it is bad. Hiding from debates can be fatal. I think it is very good to let debates rage so long as people don’t make up stuff out of thin air or lie about statistics. And always, we have to keep a sharp eye on the past in order to understand the future.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
This is what is missing from all parts of the climate debate: all projections are based on the past and the past makes it extremely clear that before humans became a strong force in nature due to sheer numbers and using fire, the climate systems became unstable. And this instability is directly responsible for the evolution of the bigger and bigger human brain. That is, to survive in this shifting climate world, humans had to evolve very rapidly. Our ability to change our CULTURE in response to changing climate conditions is the key to human success. And can destroy us, too.
Email:
emeinel@fairpoint.net
MAILING ADDRESS:
EMS NEWS
P.O. BOX 483
BERLIN, NY 12022
Make checks out to ‘Elaine Supkis’
Click on the Pegasus icon on the right sidebar to donate via Paypal.
Culture of Life News 
Emails;
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/#more-1853
Solar;
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/07/the-lure-of-solar-forcing/
Climategate. Ha Ha. Where’s Bob Woodward?
Thanks for covering up the elite’s role in all this, Elaine. I needed a laugh.
The elite started toying around with the idea of AGW in the 70’s and 80’s and they spelled it out in the 90’s- The First Global Revolution. It couldn’t be clearer.
Snippet :
“The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.”
http://www.green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html
I hope you all checked out the loooong list of enlightened elites who belong to The Club of Rome and their sister organizations-Al Gore, Maurice Strong,Rockefeller, Clinton, Carter, Soros, Turner, Gates,Kissinger,Queen Beatrix,on and on and on …ad nauseum.
Global warming had nothing to do with cleaning up the environment, and EVERYTHING to do with money and control.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: On the contrary, we ARE changing the mix of gases of our biosphere and this will have some impact. Acid rain is even worse. We can’t burn all the coal without creating vast changes in our biosphere. The dangers are real. And do note, Sky darling, that there are big, big money guys in the oil and coal industries who are misleading you. TRUST NO ONE. Don’t fall foolishly into someone else’s even worse trap. Something you seem very prone to doing.
good post ems, thank you, a good read.
since you won’t let the vaccination topic go, do you know of any studies that been conducted on the cumulative effect of vaccines on an individuals system. It’s quite possible that one or ten vaccines are safe, but 20 or 30 can have increased chances of detrimental side effects. I asked my doctor about this and she I’m sure they have done studies but then could not name a single one (doctors are busy so this doesn’t mean anything i realize).
Also it bothers me that vaccine makers are given immunity for their product. Since the companies make a profit off of the sale of these products it seems to me that they should stand behind them.
I have heard the governments stance that immunity is required or the companies won’t produce the vaccine. If that’s the case then have the government produce the vaccine. They surely have the capacity.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: Vaccine makers have ‘immunity’ due to US patients flooding courts with lawsuits that are often emotional, not based on real science. That is, the people who insist that vaccinations cause autism. We would have no vaccinations for anyone if these people were allowed to have these lawsuits. This is called ‘the common good.’
Killing 20% of our children is a very bad idea so we have to make vaccinations available, one way or another. If people think an unvaccinated world would be paradise, I say, look at history. It is pretty grim reading. Our government doesn’t produce vaccinations, by the way, because it is not a socialist system. It is a ‘capitalist’ system. If you want socialist medicine, I am 100% for that.
@ ziff house- Great links !
I thoroughly enjoyed reading the comments section. The AGW fanatics were backpedaling faster than dyslexic ducks on steroids in their efforts to excuse and exonerate the despicable actions of the climate ‘ scientists’ in the leaked emails.
You are wrong, Sky. The emails do not disprove global warming, it shows that scientists can be stupid or difficult like other people.
The people who believe that burning eons of fossil fuels is OK are obtuse, to be blunt. Yes, it does affect the earth.
But as I keep saying, the final arbiter as to the temperature of this planet, the main force by far and away, is the SUN. And we have a sun that is less than reliable these days.
‘Climate change pushes poor women to prostitution, dangerous work’
http://tinyurl.com/yzmdkv3
OK: Plovering, thanks for the link. The UN is claiming global warming, not vast population growth thanks to VACCINATIONS, is causing women to go to other lands to seek their fortunes.
Do note why there is overpopulation there…ahem.
The scientists should get a carbon footprint on their asses for this.
Climateaudits Mcintyre seemed like a pretty reasonable/likable guy when I watched his interview. I wonder does he screen all the negative posts on his site, according to the emails realclimate does.
TheRulesOfTheGame.pdf seemed pretty disgusting to me. These are supposed to be scientist but this looks like corporate marketing to me:
snip…
“a new way of thinking
Once we’ve eliminated the myths, there is room for some new ideas. These principles relate to some of the key ideas emerging
from behaviour change modelling for sustainable development:
5. Climate change must be ‘front of mind’ before persuasion works Currently, telling the public to take notice of climate change is
as successful as selling tampons to men. People don’t realise (or remember) that climate change relates to them.
6. Use both peripheral and central processing Attracting direct attention to an issue can change attitudes, but peripheral messages can be just as effective: a tabloid snapshot of Gwyneth Paltrow at a bus stop can help change attitudes to public transport.
7. Link climate change mitigation to positive
desires/aspirations. Traditional marketing associates products with the aspirations of
their target audience. Linking climate change mitigation to home improvement, self-improvement, green spaces or national pride are all worth investigating.
8. Use transmitters and social learning
People learn through social interaction, and some people are better teachers and trendsetters than others. Targeting these
people will ensure that messages seem more trustworthy and are transmitted more effectively.
9. Beware the impacts of cognitive dissonance Confronting someone with the difference between their attitude and their actions on climate change will make them more likely to change their attitude than their actions.
blowing away 2
myths
Many of the oft-repeated communications methods and messages of sustainable development have been dismissed by mainstream communicators, behaviour change experts and psychologists. Before we go into what works, our principles make a ‘clean sweep’ of what doesn’t:
1. Challenging habits of climate change communication
Don’t rely on concern about children’s future or human survival instincts
Recent surveys show that people without children may care more
about climate change than those with children. “Fight or flight” human
survival instincts have a time limit measured in minutes – they are of
little use for a change in climate measured in years.
Don’t create fear without agency
Fear can create apathy if individuals have no ‘agency’ to act upon the threat. Use fear with great caution.
Don’t attack or criticise home or family
It is unproductive to attack that which people hold dear.
2. Forget the climate change detractors
Those who deny climate change science are irritating, but unimportant. The argument is not about if we should deal with climate
change, but how we should deal with climate change.
3. There is no ‘rational man’
The evidence discredits the ‘rational man’ theory – we rarely weigh objectively the value of different decisions and then take the clear self-interested choice.
4. Information can’t work alone
Providing information is not wrong; relying on information alone to change attitudes is wrong. Remember also that messages about
saving money are important, but not that important.”
snip…
I do feel great that they have had some help from the snake oil salesmen.
Let´s just all hope that the product is as good the marketing.
Global warming and rising CO2 levels elevate viral infections and may cause pandemics, so says official in Queen’s Own Government.
This memo was written prior to joyous news from CRU at EAU reaching QOG canceling GW and a priori SFP.
Click to access climatechange_grunhausproject.pdf
@ JT- “Let´s just all hope that the product is as good the marketing.”
The ‘ product’ that the climate scientists are selling here is UN Agenda 21…all wrapped up in fake global warming ribbons and bows.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/15713
“Many of the oft-repeated communications methods and messages of sustainable development ….”
Sustainable development ( Agenda 21) is NWO code for the reduction of the western standard of living to that of feudal serfdom.
The brainwashing techniques employed by the climate scientists in the RulesOfTheGame pdf come straight out of the elite’s think tanks , probably the Tavistock Institute.
http://oneheartbooks.com/books/mind_control/tavistock_coleman.htm
From The RulesOfThe Game pdf which JT posted :
“Don’t attack or criticise home or family
It is unproductive to attack that which people hold dear.”
Unproductive, is it ? Yes, well I imagine it would be. Attacking your family would expose them for who they REALLY are. So they prefer to employ more oblique mind bending techniques.
Make no mistake about it. The elite hold us in utter contempt.
“There is no ‘rational man’”
“Information can’t work alone….relying on information alone to change attitudes is wrong.”
“People don’t realise (or remember) that climate change relates to them.”
This is another reason to stop the cyber security bills also, it is obvious that we need hackers to protect us from the ones who want to protect us!
@sky:
Yeah, this email leak started out as a lot of fun. Once you read that .pdf. -sigh-
You suddenly realize what this whole thing is, it is a political campaign and the election date is next month. I bet the scientists have been dragged into this.
They have politicians so deep in this they can´t turn back. Most climate scientist interviewed here and on the blogs I read today all said the same thing: Media is publishing worst case scenarios hundreds of years away and that science has been politizised.
Seawater is rising 3 mm per year (and it has been rising since the 1940´s, the warming has been 0,8 degrees in hundred years even according to the research. And according to the emails we will have a plateau and colding until 2020 (that´s from the leaked emails).
But the hype and fear has to be created in order to move the masses.
-sigh-
Curious Elaine, How did galileo “see” the sunspots without burining out his retinas?
I was under the impression that if you looked at the sun long enough you can permently damage your vision. Using binoculars or any magnifiying lenses only intensifies the strength of the uv and other harmful radiation.
I was under the impression that scientist used recording or pictures to study the sun nowdays because it removed the uv radiation that caused the “burning” of your retinas.
btw, the historical role of astronomers was always to figure out the seasons and when was the best time to plant/harvest their crops. Climatologist are mostly quacks who want to push a certain agenda (they are dealing with the past and pretend that they can just translate that into the future). Meterologist are much more intelligent and point out that 2 weeks is the longest time span that you can make accurate climate predictions because the variables are so volatile and unpredictable that you can end up making yourself look like a fool if your predictions are incorrect.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: Early astronomers hurt their eyes. And yes, he not only saw the sun spots but drew accurate pictures of them. For over 100 years, no one believed his observations since no one could see it, too. It got very cold during that time.
After peak-oil, monetary/credit expansion will no longer be the mechanism for gnome monopoly or the driver of western wealth. Bilderbergers hope that Copenhagen will take the place of central banking.
On the front side of the Hubbert curve, central banking allowed gnomes wealth and control by decreasing and directing some of the gain; on the back side of the Hubbert curve, emissions (energy) controls might allow gnomes wealth and control by increasing and directing the losses.
Let’s compare front side Hubbert curve vs. back side:
1) Balance global trade with T-bill IOUs vs. balance global trade with emissions indulgences from industrializing BRICs. In other words, get China to pay back its profits for the privilege of using oil to produce goods it exports for us to buy cheap.
2) Use credit expansion in the third world to increase western wealth and monopolize monetary increases called for by year over year increases in energy production. vs. Use climate change mitgation and adaptation to starve the third world into decreasing its consumption faster than peak oil falls off. Local kleptocrats and western companies get the same kickback and business interest in either case.
3) Maintain control by siphoning profits from and directing credit expansion called for by energy increases to private equity, media, and politicians. vs. Maintain control by siphoning profits from the proposed carbon offset derivatives market that picks up the slack, as long as consumption falls faster than energy production declines.
Even if global warming is occurring, even if it is caused by carbon emissions as opposed to solar activity, volcanoes, or con-trails, even if it will increase temperatures by as much as a couple degrees in a hundred years, is it really more pressing than peak-oil or WWIII. No.
Is the Copenhagen paradigm necessary to preserve western wealth? As opposed to tribute, conquest, or a willingness to diminish? No, bankers are trying to preserve a facsimile of their monopoly on credit increases called for by increases in production. The basis for that monopoly ceased to exist with peak oil.
Currently I suspect that these insane NWO zionists, if unchecked, will lead us to a future of continued western de-industrialization, Soilent Green, 1984, Dolcett Girls, and selective ethnic starvation as they buy time to screw their way into the BRIC Elite families, who will most likely take advantage of their wares and then afterwards kick them to the curb.
@Sky, “Tavistock Institute’
Wonderful stuff.
The “Biological Degradation Forum” was particularly winsome:
“The suppresion of people through poisoned food, water and medicine. (pesticides, flouride, vaccines, ect.)”
Though one might quibble over their use of “suppression” … “vaccine” was apt.
Small world.
”the main force by far and away, is the SUN. And we have a sun that is less than reliable these days.”
i read some blog’s, mostly sinclair , Dening’r , because the mainstream media is totally hooped. Of them all ,this one is the best, the others i find make a number of gloriously true statements followed by at least one monstrous dud [ Gw denialist rhetoric]. one bad apple spoils the bunch i find, as another grievous error is likely to follow.
So i am somewhat puzzled by this repeated view of solar irradiance which appears to be total conjecture in the face of evidence to the contrary, especially strange from one who prides herself on thoughtfull research.
Elaine, I have a few quibbles with your assertions today: using the word ‘trick’ in a fashion totoally devoid of context tells us nothing more than what you may imagine is going on. Using a Fourier Transformation on accumulated data can be called a ‘trick’, but the data is unreadable without. The scientists did not infer thay were ‘throwing out’ the tree ring data. They were acknowledging the limitations of their model of using these data to provide temperature. That is part of the scientific process: collect data, build a model, evaluate the model. And finally, ‘the rich’ fund very little research in this country, because research is expensive and they are stingy. Most scientific research in this country is funded by the government: NIH, NSF, etc. The Petroleum Research Fund sponsors some, but this is an industry organization, not ‘the rich’.
I really suggest a good bit of caution in drawing conclusions from some culled ‘releases’ of other people’s e-mails. It could make one seem naive.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE; The emails are correct in that they show the social inner workings of academia which ruthlessly enforces dogma. We see this very clearly in the economics departments of universities. And WHO FUNDS THE UNIVERSITIES WITH ENDOWMENTS?
Rich people. As a person who grew up inside of the university system thanks to my dad, the rich people/government/professor relationship is very entangled. Very, very entangled. As any university president about this and they will assure you, corporations of all sorts are very entangled. I used to run a computer fabrication lab at and who did I see a lot?
IMB executives! This is true in all fields. Ask anyone in the universities.
GW review from Lizard offal office.
But once the Ice Age gets a grip on the systems
.
lemon is good
.
im all about the stewardship of the planet… but global warming management is more of a unrealistic response to a natural carbon planetary life cycle… possibly the states of energy the planet itself uses to ballence life on the planet is infanately more dynamic that the crude measures man would use to ‘burry’ carbon ‘gas’
.
anyways regardless of how anyone feels about cheap energy…. it still needs to get cheaper…. and oil and coal have no potential to fulfill this need…. short term reliance on consumable energy that is non renewable is just bad math… thats all… we need to suck all the oil out of the planet and burn all the coal… that doesnt mean planning like a 12 yr old is the way to do it…
.
any ‘use the reserves first’ then worry about energy consumption and security is what the banks would like to see…. volatile accessible intermediate exploitation that serves their political pockets
.
sensible policy… and i dont mean ‘credits’… a real energy policy that confirms a new direction… instead of a payoff for the end running energy management that best suits politically driven markets supervised by ‘slow to respond’ regulators, that reward credits to ever envelope pressing monopolistic arbitrage
.
old technology is getting older…. and ‘they’ want us to pay more for it while we still can…. mite as well invest in proven intermediate energy solutions like nuclear
.
.
the talent of the rich isnt the talent of the people more often
domingo
November 22, 2009 at 1:11 am
Curious Elaine, How did galileo “see” the sunspots without burining out his retinas?
.
just like 12yr olds watch eclipses id imagine… pan of water or something… the guy invented the telescope…
.
all i can do is ride in a alien spaceship if i want to see anything in orbit… nasa wont take me
nah: It never occurred to me that he could use a reflection to “see” it indirectly.
The problem with water is that the sun would be distorted or not magnified enough to make out any detail.
I asked my sister and she told me that she read somewhere that you can look relatively safely when the Sun is close to the horizon or when it is covered by a thin veil of clouds or mist.
Her husband told me that you can buy “colored” glasses and they supposedly block the UV radiation that is responsible for the damage. Basically he told me that he once went to an observatory and they told him that they used colored lenses to view the sun.
Damn, I’m not very creative! I guess i made the mistake of thinking that they were all primitives back in the day and weren’t capable of “experimentation” back then.
Quite embarrassing that i never thought that a solution could be so simple. I was expecting some hocus pocus or some brilliant contraption.
http://www.informationarbitrage.com/2009/11/rethinking-the-wall-street-business-model.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+InformationArbitrage+%28Information+Arbitrage%29
Rethinking The Wall Street Business Model (Part 1)
.
The problem is that both regulators and risk managers have not kept pace with the increasing scale and complexity of the 21st century Wall Street firm, leading to the dramatic (over) reaction to the financial crisis by the US Government and the populist backlash from ripped-off US taxpayers.
.
banks are cons, government is dumb when required, and the people get screwed by the banks ‘guess what’
.
guy wants to make a case for modern investment…. the USA will never be poor…. so if ‘government’ cannot protect the people from Al’Queda or Banks or whatever…. let the chinese fight them id say…. or have the banks surrender jeezus…. modern investment has transformed into credit/inflation/wealth…. like the guy points out this is not the 1940s we need to get real
The gaining of Greenland, Antarctica, Siberia and northern Canada as lands we can colonize and which will be very fruitful, has to be weighed against the rising oceans and the expansion of some deserts.
yeah, screw the rest of the inhabitants of the planet, all the rest of the flora and fauna…what’s best for humans is what’s best period.
talk about short sighted…
if it wasn’t such a bad pun I’d say that you can’t see the forest for the trees…
shame on you, Elaine.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: I see you are one of the ‘let’s freeze the entire earth in the present status quo’ sort of person. Mother Nature doesn’t give a hoot about our status quo. Neither does the sun. Both have a very, very long history of many millions of years of changing things, sometimes very greatly and quite suddenly.
http://www.informationarbitrage.com/2009/11/rethinking-the-wall-street-business-model.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+InformationArbitrage+%28Information+Arbitrage%29
Rethinking The Wall Street Business Model (Part 1)
.
Revisit risk-weighted capital methodologies and move towards a mark-to-market framework
.
what if government lets banks re-write the law…. with the blessing of the central clearing houses…. and it can go on for 2yrs-10
.
Push over-the-counter assets onto exchanges
.
but its all still under the table, and backed by the FED
.
Idea #3: Eliminate sell-side payments to rating agencies (and perhaps the agencies themselves)
.
so the banks own the risk?
.
Idea #4: Revisit risk-weighted capital methodologies and move towards a mark-to-market framework
.
what mark to market framework, they dont have the capitol to operate with numbers like these on their books carried at these values thats why they are unloading on the government…. insentivised participation in a illiquid ratings insurance contractual obligation is just that…. someone elses problem that pays a commision aparently o’… and it gets a mark as a trade
.
Idea #5: Give traders an equity interest in their strategies
.
but they whine about not getting bonuses when its all tax moneys…. these guys sell heavy industry overseas and support ‘fair trade’ driving unions to the trough of ‘joe labor’…. while living in another dimension???
.
.
.
.
so everyone in the financial institutions believed in the general INFLATIONARY STRATEGY the banks were pursuing 4 yrs ago… but now that they have gutted large portions of the ‘production’ economy and we cant be stupid rich trickle down helpers
.
our credit to the cause of failure of an enterprise is the single most important cause if its banking
.
.
.
how about this… bankers are rich… and we dont need them as much as doctors in the modern economy as much as they would like to believe… how much do doctors make
banking is nearing religion when cash deposits cant make money…. how much does a priest make
.
no security for hard cash…. the banks will print money instead…. no explanations for the unclean…. the money is worth less when you comprehend ‘value’
gar gar gar… cant produce a quality product at a profit… need a raise… gar gar gar… rewrite the contract and observe previous gains… gar gar gar… get the government involved… gar gar gar… so important we can destroy the economy… gar gar gar
There’s a good summary of the content of the hacked database (so far) here:
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/11/20/climate-cuttings-33.html
And as an example of the political reason for pushing AGW, a news story about how the unelected totalitarian President of the EU intends to raise taxes from the people who didn’t elect him via CO2 taxes (taxation without representation) here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6623665/Van-Rompuy-wants-the-EU-to-run-on-CO2.html
Post-doctorate medical researchers I have argued with on the veracity of AGW as laid out by Michael Mann et al – their main defence was that Mann et al were authorities in this field whereas I was not. So they trusted the experts. These emails expose (some of) these guys as crude propagandists.
Elaine – you should apply your analytical prowess on the source material, and maybe try to figure out to what extent the evidence in support of AGW it discredits. Many published papers seem to use the same discredited datasets, and the peer review process appears to have been corrupted.
Sorry Elaine to posting so much, this thing just made me extremely mad (and a lot of other people here). You see we have been paying these taxes here already for years.
I have no problem with saving energy, stopping pollution, trying to find alternatives for oil etc.
My biggest problem with this is that IPCC has a huge marketing machine spinning this and politicians are involved. They also try to discredit others and not give out the data (which they´ve apparently lost anyway).
There will be global warming someday again, but why are so many other scientists not taken into account. It´s just computer calculations, we really don´t know anything for certain.
Geologists, astrophysicists, climate researchers of opposing view are discredited (it´s the name of the game, it´s all in IPCC marketing plan .pdf).
All climate change research is based on these few studies by a very small group of scientists. And it seems they might have left opposing material out, peer checking is not valid etc.
Here are a couple of videos that take into account other things besides CO2.
ems, you can do better on defending vaccines. The courts know how to deal with frivolous law suits. They do it day in and day out, it’s their job. Blaming it all on parents of autistic children is short sighted and probably cruel. According to your statistical analysis if the vaccines save 20,000 lifes but alter 19,999 then they are worth it. And apparently you would rather not know why those people were affected, or make any improvements to the vaccine to make it better and less harmful. Modern science should be about improving their products and the court system is a natural way to settle disputes and show ways to improve their products. Doctors are not gods and make mistakes all the time, I believe they are the 3rd leading cause of death in the us (medical mistakes). Why not improve upon this, shielding them from lawsuits encourages bad behavior.
And by the way, socialized medicine is fine by me. Equal access to medicine and the courts should be encouraged.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE; Frivolous lawsuits are very destructive and has warped US healthcare to the extreme and costs us very dearly in ALL medical fields, especially in ones like childbirth.
I have written a great deal about the climate in the past. For example, I explained long ago that humans have been interfering with nature’s balance when we discovered how to use fire about 200,000 years ago.
That is, we would use fire to drive game and this caused many plains fires over the centuries. It changed the nature of forests and plains tremendously.
Once we domesticated dogs (formed an alliance with wolves, in other words) we used them to herd animals and then our animal herding changed the environment, too.
Then, we began to chop down trees which dramatically changed things. But to this day, this very day, the ‘slash and burn’ business of paleolithic days CONTINUES virtually unchanged!
This is a major problem because humans happen to like desertfication so a great degree.
So medicine should be held above the law. What else? Banks? Governments? Bloggers? Climatologists?
Provide access to the courts to settle disputes otherwise things get ugly real fast. Perhaps you prefer pitchforks.
PUBLIC health is always ‘above the law’ in the sense that it IS the ‘law’. Just as we have seat belt laws and no one is allowed to challenge this in court by suing auto makers over seat belt matters….while the government regulates seatbelt safety and does recalls, etc so it is with vaccinations.
So we can have protections without it being constantly challenged in court over all sorts of issues.
One CAN do this via Congress!
And note that the antivaccinationists are hot and heavy with lobbying for changing things so we have no more public health protections.
Anyone (and they are DAMN FEW) who do have a problem caused by vaccinations are given money and support but only from the government, they can sue for many millions of dollars.
If the auto manufacturer makes a faulty seat belt of course they can be sued. Forced into a recall for instance. The problem with “the public good” is who gets to set what it is. To use an obvious extreme Hitler defined many things as the public good which weren’t always in the public’s interest. Bush thought torture was for the public good, I would disagree. The bank bailout was sold as a public good.Authority needs to be challenged now and then to keep it in check. Doesn’t mean vaccines are bad, just they should be held to same standards as other medical products. Do I need to site examples of where doctors thought they were acting in the public good but by today’s standards are considered barbaric? How does one improve the system if it cannot be held accountable. That’s all I’m saying. Without resorting to “crazy conspiracy theories” and the like. Perhaps your a bit more more “elitist” than you present yourself, thinking you know what the public good is.
All I know for sure is that we know very little and should be very skeptical of those who profess otherwise.
That being said I’ll drop this line of inquiry since we seemed to have exhausted the debate.And thank you for providing a forum for debate, since it is your blog you have the right to set the rules and I appreciate you allowing me to be heard.
Take care all.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE; Societies that cleave to the ‘common good’ do much better than those that are anarchistic. The US healthcare system has been riddled to death by lawsuits. It is by far and away the most expensive system on earth and insuring our doctors is very, very, massively expensive. And if we apply this sort of madness to systems dealing with INFECTIOUS DISEASES we will end up with endless plagues and no one willing to provide ANY services at all.
Seriously, only a demented person can believe that say, small pox, was an OK disease and didn’t need vaccinations. Or measles or mumps which maim and kill children, are OK. This madness disturbs me greatly. If we have everyone who has an itch sue vaccination producers, the cost of vaccinations will shoot through the roof….EXACTLY like giving childbirth.
The reason childbirth was cheap in my mother’s day was due to virtually no one suing doctors delivering babies. By 1980, this became quite common and now doctors delivering babies pay tremendous insurance costs.
So if global warming is true, where are the real estate investors and the land speculators buying land? Where will the next beach front property be? Which scientists have taken land options north of Alberta? Who is buying up Kamchatka and Sakhlin? If the seas rise several feet on average world wide, then the ice weight on the land surfaces will be removed and earthquakes will happen and new mountain vistas worth much viewing wealth will appear.
Really folks it does NOT matter that some scientists manipulated the data to come to a pre-ordained and political conclusion, that is the nature of governmental science ( you might remember that when you hear about the next pandemic too since this one is a bit of a wuss as pandemics go). Cap and Trade will allow the old carbon offsets to be traded on some unregulated exchange. Some folks will make fiat money some will be taxed to death. It is just the nature of the game.
Socialism has always been elitist. Of, by and for the elites.
It is wonderful that the vaccine makers alone of all the medical quakery and non quakery types have blanket immunity for injuries, deaths, lifelong conditions caused by their output. That little bit of heaven was put into a homeland security bill by Senator Bill Frist who then left the senate and went back to his family’s health company (Humama for those who wonder about such things.)
It’s like the recent finding that women should not have mammograms until they hit their fifties. Govt. sponsored health research, done for only the best interests of the female population of the USA. Maybe one should ask why there were no oncologists or women’s health specialists on the committee. Maybe one should ask why the head author of the report is Kaiser Permanent employee. Maybe one should but why bother, it’s just more of the same.
Womens mammaries, global warming, faux-pandemics and vaccine shortages … one could do worse than become cynical.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: What planet do you live on???? Socialism is for the ‘elites’? HUH????? Look, I ask for a minimum of sanity here.
i get the feeling Elaine is soft on this topic because explaining science to merkins is like telling a cow to stop shitting in its food. and she will lose more readers.
i don’t see much thats damming in the emails, remember they have to battle an asymetrical war with the opppostion, one stupid lie takes pages of rebuttal. This will get worse now with these emails as everything is out of context, no one can handle the simple science as it is. None of this really makes any difference as the effort is going into NOT doing anything about it.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: CO2 gases are definitely rising rapidly. And the burning of the jungles is also damaging climate conditions, drying out the equatorial belt greatly. The emails in this story don’t show a conspiracy, they show academics closing ranks just because they can do this.
ALL academics do this! For example, when I was in college and minored in music, there was this raging battle on the part of those of us who love melodic music to stop the stupid atonal music worship.
One professor even sneered at me, saying, ‘So, you like tunes, do you? No one will ever hire you to teach, you know.’ I said, ‘You are destroying music and eventually will have no job at all, anywhere.’
Just like many humans (see all the hysteria whenever I suggest other information!) when I go crosswise to prevailing mythologies and belief systems! People, once they believe in some construct or ideology, will rather die than make even slight alterations to their brains! It is IMPOSSIBLE.
This is why it is always an uphill battle to get people to consider some incoming data that conflicts with pet beliefs. And people work in gangs (we see this here with the 9/11 and the antivaccinationists) to try to intimidate or enforce ideology. No matter how irrational or even demented their own positions might be.
The real crime is against, the life forms we live with and our own future generations. Its not about whether we can prove GW now , why do the experiment if one of the outcomes is so catastrophic for us. would you play russian roulette.?
the truth is you don’t give a dam about anything including your children .
the tradgedy is the corrective measures would do us good. we forget the psyhcological effects of technology ‘everything for nothing’ we’ve forgotten our connection to the planet, to whats real.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE; This is the tragedy; the bankers wanted to play this new, ‘vast’ energy derivatives market. The scientists are really scared (mostly because they leave the sun out of their calculations) so the scientists were conned into playing this ‘scare everyone this year’ game which is why they issued dire warnings…in the teeth of a very cold summer.
This damaged all the patient work people like myself have done for many years! I have pushed for restricting oil and coal burning for the obvious reason, we need to protect these resources for future generations! If nothing else!
And I have been a proponent for alternative energy since I was a teenager! We are talking long, long ago here! Now, no one will listen to us. The global warming people shot their wad and missed their target. This stinks.
One lie dressed up as honest science takes decades to refute. The Mann report was such a lie. It was a lie in service to money making. Carbon offsets/cap and trade. It was a lie that now has much inertia behind it. There is nothing in carbon offsets or cap and trade that benefits the earth, your progeny, or the itty bitty fishies and other wonderous creatures.
The one email where they had to HIDE the cooling trend that was in the data was enough. Hide does not mean clairify or expose or explain. So they used a cheap trick to bury the cooling trend and there’s your manbearpig global warming.
If you have an issue with how you treat the rest of this world’s creatures, then change your behaviour. Be a vegan, if you can stomach the screams of the poor crucified onions and other veggies as they are ripped from mother earth’s warm loving embrace. Wear cotton and hemp clothing and sandals, live the simple life. Leave the internet.
Being born is to be forced into playing russian roulette. You are going to die. The rest is just a matter of when the chamber with your name on it comes under the hammer.
ZH say: “the truth is you don’t give a dam about anything including your children .”
Can I sell you a broader brush today?
If you wish to reconnect to “what is real” be my guest. No one will attempt to stop you from finding your lost reality. Not all that interested in having you foist your foibles on me however.
Meanwhile it is getting colder.
Colder is not good news. Long term cooling without any oil left for agriculture = massive die off of humans.
The little ice age was a pain. A great ice age will clean the board and let some new evolutionary genius appear.
‘its getting colder”
what an idiot, ask the inuit whats happening, you can see the polar caps melting now. hell, i’ve been to the arctic [ellesmere] myself , i could tell you what i saw up close and personal, we even had someone along who had been there a decade earlier and knew the difference.
i’m the idiot, fooling with fools.
I also live in a place of mountains and glaciers. I can go and see the result of warming anytime and measure it with a stick if i want.
“So if global warming is true, where are the real estate investors and the land speculators buying land? Where will the next beach front property be? Which scientists have taken land options north of Alberta? Who is buying up Kamchatka and Sakhlin?”
Ask the Chinese — if you can get into one of their secret meetings. They have the money. No one is going to sell continents to Donald Trump or anyone else who uses borrowed money, toxic mortgage sludge, or empty gold/silver ETF exchange vaults.
So sorry! Show us the money!
So out of humble respect for “blues”, I posted a second post, but it didn’t go through.
What do you think this means?
ps – CK – loved your earlier post and thank-you for the link.
ps – the above has been cut and pasted.
@ziff house, “they have to battle an asymetrical war with the opppostion, one stupid lie takes pages of rebuttal.”
Which lie and rebuttal are we talking about?
Data show that CO2 does NOT cause Global Warming. Quite the contrary.
Data show temperature rise first, and then CO2 levels increase … with a cause/effect lag time of 800 years.
CO2 is red herring … typical Lizard science.
Pelosi/Reid/Dems flog Lizard Health Care.
For the real story:
@Ziff:
You are right on everything then.
I repeat I´m not against less carbon emissions, I´m not against protecting the planet.
I´m very much a green person.
But,
I´m not a young man anymore. You have a fire in your belly and you´re going to change the world? That´s good, but remember when politicians and business people are interested in your cause it is always about power or money. Usually both.
I just hope you will not be too cynical later when you notice that the money paid to developing countries by the climate treaties planned at the moment (300 billion per year to China for example) will be pocketed by multinationals who have/will have all their factories there. China is building 300 coal powered power plants for them as we speak.
And I hope your heart will not turn to stone when you pay 300% more for electricity and Goldman boys are pocketing the difference.
I´ve said a lot of good could come from the climate treaty. But we could do so much better.
And it seems CRU boys at UEA have gotten a bit too much money and fame. I fear they have bent the rules a bit. Money and fame are addictive I guess. I wouldn´t know 😉 .
But peace anyway and all the best.
I´ve said my piece on this and will stop spamming this issue. Just as a courtesy to you.
This just makes me sad. Maybe back in the day when I still had a heart it would´ve made me as angry as you.
michaeldon
November 22, 2009 at 10:33 pm
The real truth is nobody cares about the science because it’s too hard for most people to understand.
These things get decided by emotional debates between joe public and potitical/commercial interests.
.
.
.
emotional debate is this… oil is the best there ever was… so its going to get ‘stolen’ from the planet by corporate/government entitys for the highest purposes its use can streamline and accelerate
.
if that means global warming so be it…. im not pretending the world is a magical forest of dreams…. we only got one shot at this thing called eternity and the oil has to go into magnifying humanity’s progress and soon…. but every day we can postpone the ‘reserves’ depletion the more chance we may have a chance to look back at how primitive large swathes of uneducated unscientific man did not destroy the ‘easy’ wealth and be GREATFUL….
.
nuclear war is the worst… and oil is one of the tools of recovery…. its just there and as long as iran and co. go about pretending their in it to win humanity’s power with preposterous claims on our future…. i wouldnt be so hasty to burn our precious oil
.
1000 yrs has come and gone for 1000 years
The validity of global warming theory is not as important as the economic impact of Copenhagen. Keeping the debate mired in science and far afield of the new world economic order is the intention of the banking kleptocrats.
The paradox of caring for this planet is belied by WWI and WWII and will be put permanently to rest in WWIII. We can destroy everything. Look at videos of the US invading a nearly totally disarmed Iraq!
We went in, guns blazing, and totally wrecked the place including nuclear waste pollution. Far from fixing this, we left this waste all over Falluja, for example.
And here we are, fretting about global warming as we struggle to control Iraq’s oil so we can consume it even faster….!!!!!
@buffalo_ken
The noise is the skyline.
Jt; we agree on something then.
Best.
EMS, socialism was invented by the elite. One world ruled by socialism is their ultimate goal. Look at USA right now, as planned it is slowly being turned into a socialist state.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: At no time in history have ‘elites’ wanted to share the wealth. The history of fighting for socialism is all about workers pushing very, very hard. When ‘elites’ finally do grant socialist agenda items, it is to forestall revolutions and uprisings.
The French aristos invented socialism to regain the power and authority they had had under the ancien regime. That power was usurped for a short while by the Revolutionaries. It didn’t take all that long for the aristos to be back in power as socialists. Same same in Germany and England and Italy. The USA lucked out for another hundred years but succumbed to the socialistic in 1913. It’s been downhill for the USA since then.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: That has to be one of the most bizarre renditions of history I have ever seen! Talk about crazy! So, the French peasants revolted because they had ‘socialism’???? Good grief. Karl Marx is laughing at you.
Climate change stopped being a “scientific” debate a long time ago. Now it’s a political debate, and in political debates the loudest noise wins.
I’m much less concerned that some climatologists edited their case for public consumption than I am concerned that this will be taken as sufficient reason to cease work on alternative energy sources just as things were beginning to get interesting.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: Correct, the Global Warming side of the debate shot itself in the foot, big time.
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times ( 1789-1799). The proles revolted because they wanted to excise some fat from the national population. The fat didn’t want to be rendered but they were. Madame Guillotine lopped about 1500 heads. The remaining aristos invented socialism to save their asses and regain their power and pelf. You could look it up.
Socialism created and implemented, by the aristos after the prole uproar.
Proles loved socialism ( most folks like a little something for nothing. )
Aristos got the power … proles got the day old bread … France got Napoleon … French happy … rest of europe, not so much.
Marx ( 1814 – 1883) was a bit after the french revolution.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: What on earth are you talking about? France had an empire under Napoleon but it was not ‘socialism’. Socialism came after Marx wrote his famous book.
@buffalo ken, no, i do not, i like to hit the submit comment button myself a lot 😛
@EMS, the isms have been created by the elite to divide the people amongst themselves, you know: socialism atheism fascism nazism spiritualism gnosticism communism catholicism capitalism feminism darwinism scepticism racism idealism occultism christianism nihilism judaism baptism buddhism hinduism satanism realism vegetarianism polytheism anthropomorphism conservatism ritualism paganism emotionalism altruism egoism materialism charlatanism mysticism criticism monotheism esotericism platoism dogmatism pessimism pantheism proselytism barbarism fanaticism theism asceticism monism substantialism phallicism fetishism transcendentalism.
The list goes on and on. The pen is mightier than the sword after all! A quote not unfamiliar to you EMS, amirite?
Wu Wei, your list is very stupid. See how you imagine any and all historical forces are caused by these ‘elites’ you seem unable to understand at all.
For example, was Jesus an ‘elite’?
Most of these were created by the elite. And yes not all of them were created by the elite, some of them were good in the beginning (great examples: Buddha’s teachings, Jezus teachings) but have turned into something full of dogma’s and rules, completely defiled and corrupted, no longer having anything to do with the orginal teachings, little boxes in which we are allowed to move, ISMS, all of these now work for the elite instead of against them. ISMS are the elite’s best friend!
Would Christ really wanted for us to kill people in his name? Would the Buddha really wanted for us to wither our lives away in monasteries in some orange robe?
Idealism or Materialism? The Eternal Trap of Dualism.
Reality!
The ISMS keeps man trapped in dualism, trapped in a box, fighting the other who adheres to another ISM. ISMS are the elite’s best friend!
Rules of The Game – concise edition:
Appropriate for any criminal conspiracy.
Global Warming
Health Care & Vaccines
Food & Drugs
Housing
War & Peace
http://salem-news.com/articles/november222009/greenscam_2_ew.php
ISM – EMS, so close 😛
Your ‘dualism’ is your inability to understand how things change over time. Next time you make sweeping historical stories, stop painting with only black and white colors.
Plovering, if you think modern healthcare is an evil conspiracy, I wish I could transport you via a time machine to a happier age like 1348 and drop you into Merrie England….
“ELAINE: Early astronomers hurt their eyes.”
Elaine, I really doubt that many of them did much damage to their eyes from looking at the sun through telescopes! It was well known that lenses could actually start a fire by concentrating the sun’s rays at the focal point, and the astronomers were not stupid. More likely, they observed the solar disk through heavily smoked glass or by projecting the image onto a screen and viewing it. I have observed sunspots through a telescope equipped with a solar filter similar to the smoked glass. No eye damage was done.
Rick
Of course, but they also still did damage to the eyes. Solar observations became much more sophisticated in the last 100 years. Actually, before recent tech changes, using telescopes and mirrors for shining the solar face onto a sheet of paper, for example, let people see things without looking directly at the sun itself.
If you want to see some humour in all this:
(sorry Ziff, had to post this one).
Elaine;
Your defense of socialism seems curious.
If it is all about the poor (it is about the poor right?), then I suggest any social program is limited to cover no more than 10% of the population. That’s to say that no more then 10% of the population should be getting help by the remaining 90% at any given time. Or, no more then 10% of our salaries would be diverted toward all social programs combined. My conservative friends would suggest 5% should be the absolute limit.
Any time a social program goes beyond 10%, it stops being a safety net and we start becoming socialist.
By limiting the reaches of social programs we guarantee our liberties.
Hysteria is never a good way to convince the masses. Remember the masses as a hole are smarter then the few. Anyone that disagrees could be considered as part of the elite and the over confidence is annoying.
The best way to convince people is economically.
Example: Right now it cost about $5 per Watt for a home solar system plus installation and other equipment. For a 4 Kilowatt system it would cost $20,000 for the solar panels plus $5,000 to $10,000 for the extras. At current prices it would take 20+ years to cover the $30,000. It does not make since but stay with me.
Lets say the government wanted to fund a program to place solar systems on all 100 Million Homes in the US. OK, I know there is more than 100 Million Homes but this makes the math easier and with an average of 3 people living in each house it covers the 300 Million people living in the US. If my math is correct, the program would cost $3 trillion ($30,000 X 100 Million Homes). Someone please check my math. Still does not make since but I wanted to throw it out there especially in light of the recent government ideas we can not pay for.
We can not let this stop us. There is new technology in solar panels (thin film) A-si. It is cheaper to produce, the target is $1 per watt. Same calculations as above, the 4 Kilowatt system would cost: $4,000 for the panels and still $5,000 to $10,000 for the extra’s. So about half the price or $14,000. Same government program would now cost $1.4 Trillion. Getting closer but now my conservatism kicks in. Covering the 10% poor would cost $140 Billion. The government could front the rest of us with a 6 year payback (same amount we currently pay for electricity). Just a note: this would produce about 1/3 of the electricity currently produced in the US.
If the only thing we used this electricity for is to power our GM Volt like cars, we could reduce oil consumption in half. This can be argued with but since I’m on a roll, let go with. What is the potential savings. Saving 5 billion barrels or 250 billion gallons at $2 each gallon equals $500 billion. How many years would the payback be: 3 years.
This would make economic since to the masses but maybe not the elites including the oil companies.
We just spent way over a trillion dollars, bailing out the biggest bankers on earth who turned around and gave themselves many, many billions in bonuses as a reward for being bailed out.
Now, about socialism: what was your objection?
Solar panel production, only if it were 100% in the US, would then be subsidized by the Bank of the United States which would replace the Federal Reserve.
This bank owned by us, ourselves, not JP Morgan, would then lend us money at a very low rate so we can buy USA solar panels and have them installed. 100% of the profits of this would flow into the hands of the workers who, under a just system, would get a good portion of the profits. This money would stay within the US, of course.
If we import all of our solar panels at any price, this US bank money would become just another bleeding ulcer and will fix nothing. Socialism is NOT ‘welfare’ it is understanding that the workforce is the wealth of nations and protecting it from exploitation and penury is extremely important. As well as not working people to death, etc. And keeping their children healthy and educated, etc.
Why should there be a “Bank of the United States” at all? If you’re a libertarian like Paul, you should be in favor of getting government out of the money business entirely. Get away from paper and back to metal money – i.e., gold – and let anyone with a punch press mint coinage. As long as it’s pure gold and weighs what the press owner says it weighs, it’s money!
At that point, anyone with some gold they don’t have an immediate use for could set themselves up as a “bank” and lend it at interest without government intervention.
Objection to Socialism,
First to the main point of the posting;
– Global Warming caused by man is nonsense.
– I like the fact the debate is in the open, thanks for this forum
– Global Climate Change is the constant caused by forces way beyond our control
– Let say a boulder is coming down a hill. Do you A) Try to stop or redirect the boulder or B) Get out of it’s way. We will get more bang for the buck to adapt.
– We need to be thoughtful in the use of our resources by making alternatives economical.
– I agree with you about the solar panels being built in the US.
Can you image how fast that would get us out of this down turn.
Back to the Socialism
To me socialism is the same thing as crying uncle, I can’t make it any more, It’s not fair, I need help. It is giving up on the Free “Fair” Market model that has made this country the best in the world and giving up your liberties. Are you not up in arms over the new Government Guidelines on breast cancer. I’m surprised women are not marching on Washington right now.
I don’t like the idea that if someone makes over what the government thinks is the prevailing wage, that they should pay more for the same things as someone making less than average wage (examples: mail, road usage, energy, health care….). This is balancing out the wages or spreading the wealth. We need the rewarding system for those that try harder and work longer to get ahead. In the long run the country is rewarded for their efforts.
The government does need to play a limited roll and leave the wealth creation to the people. All we have to do is look at history. This is where it would be fun to debate Libertarians. History proves there have been bad people in the past and limited governmental regulations are required to stop them and copy cats in the future. However this process has been highjacked by Large Corporation and Big Government. So I find it kind of strange you put your faith into an even Bigger Government.
Socialism is the elimination of competition. Competition is one of natures greatest drive. It is the one single thing that separates us from the rest of the world.
I’m sure I wore out my welcome but if interested I do have a free “fair” market plan that would solve our health care problem.
Socialism is NOT welfare. Socialism is a concept about how the State has to protect, educate, keep healthy (!!!!) and preserve working class families so that they prosper.
When they prosper, all other systems also prosper. States run for elites don’t do this. Elites want to get ‘rich’ and if this means dumping all the working class into imperialist welfare systems to keep them just above starvation but not able to save money, we get the US system.
We had the appearance of ‘wealth’ by putting the middle class deep into debt. Now, we can’t suck down more debt and the middle class is floundering thanks to too much debt they can’t roll over anymore despite the super-low interest rates given to the big banks thanks to the Fed Reserve.
About working harder: when there are not controls, people get worked to death. That is, the employed are forced to work long hours and other people are forced into no employment and are totally idle. Socialism tries to prevent this hyper-exploitation coupled with hyper-unemployment. And a good thing, too.
This is why nearly all labor laws that protect workers come during depressions when the workers get agitated and loudly demand help.
When working class families “prosper” they leave the working class. They move on up to the rentier or entrepreneur or bankster class, to the upper east side, to the bigger slice of the pie. And once they have moved on up, their kith and offspring do likewise.
Socialism is not necessary nor desireable for the folks in the upper strata until they have losses to share with the dross classes. Socialism is not a method of allowing the working class to prosper, it is a method of keeping the working class in its place and keeping the aristo classes free of working class contamination.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: Um, be consistent, please. Socialism helps workers move up the ladder. That is, if they get GOOD EDUCATION AND HEALTH for their kids AND better working conditions thanks to socialist laws, their kids are not forced to work in factories at the age of 9 and die before their 40th birthdays and they can escape via learning stuff and thus, moving up the ladder. Imagine that!
http://www.counterpunch.org/macaray11242009.html
When the working man had muscle, he counted. When the unions died so did any muscle the working stiff had. Govt doesn’t respond to morality, it does respond to muscle. Socialism never did shit for the working stiff, unions did.
And when the prices not only looked but actually were lower on the other side of some political border, production moved away. Eventually, labour costs in the USA will equilibrate with labour costs in Bangla Desh and industrial production of low cost cheap fripperies will move back to the USA.
Shame there will not be any unions to “protect” the working stiffs.
Um, that is an insane editorial. Unions=socialism! Always. The workers had muscle only when they were allied with the far left. When the US unions moved to the far right and many voted for Reagan, they were destroyed. The more the workers vote right wing, the worse off they are over time.
Your right
Socialism is a government concept that should be taught in school as examples of past failures and something not to try again.
In your socialistic world, who are the ones in control of providing protection, education, health and preserving the working class prosperity? The workers?
Give me a break, if they start off being the working class, they instantly have control and become the elites you detest. They will do everything to maintain that control.
The best government is one that provides a framework (limited) for fair prosperity. This government will also provide a safety net for those that need help to get back as a productive member of society.
By removing competition you are fighting nature and your society is doomed and will fail.
This country was not founded on socialist concepts.
If the country voted today for socialism, I would guess if would only get 15% to 20% of the votes.
If you go not like this system, it does not look like you will be able to change this country so you may need to move to another country. One that is more to your liking.
Regards
Unions don’t vote, their members do. patriotic/nationalistic/groupthinking bunch of dupes that they were, bedwettingly fearful of the blacks coming to take their jobs away, just as their forefathers had been bedwettingly scared of the italians and the poles and the children.
I held a union card for over 20 years, watched the unions betray the workers and the workers pay the unions back in kind by voting for the Nixon and the Reagan and the Bushes. Watched the smart entrepreneurs start up overseas, move stuff overseas and work the slobs of congress like cheap hookers to pass managed trade bills and MFN status for whatever pesthole was today’s currently fashionable dumping ground for manufacturing. Happiness is watching the Chinese outsmart and outmaneuver the merkin idiots. Merkin unions have never had much truck with socialism, merkin working stiffs pretty much understand that socialism is just another tool to keep the working stiff from getting off the line and out from under the thumb of the arristos.
Wow! So the anti-vaccine crowd has been replaced by the anti-socialist crowd, who do not seem to have the slightest clue as to how life was for the average (not rich) American or any other person before 1933.
My grandfather told me all about life before the New Deal and everything that came after it. Some of his siblings died at birth from preventable diseases and malnutrition.
The anti-socialist idiots will be taught a harsh lesson in the future when socialist nations dominate the world (as they always do) while “libertarian” and “anything goes” nations descend into bannana republics, as they always do.
True socialist countries do not let criminal syndicates run rampant, as other countries do. When criminal syndicates run the system, the country ceases to be socialist.
The idea that the elites like socialism means that they are true idiots since it to took 1000 years of feudalism for them to figure out they needed poor people to chop their heads off so that could create a socialist system that would… oh wait! How could they do that if they were all dead?
“Faith must trample underfoot all reason, knowledge, and understanding.” Martin Luther
US unions died but not German unions. And racism was a huge factor in all this since the major unions used to be all white and often anti-female.
For example, I couldn’t join the Carpenters Union back when graduated at the top of my class in carpentry many years ago. All the young men around me were asked to be sponsored and I was locked out.
This exclusionary system fell due to judges ruling against the unions. And so, to spite their own faces, they voted GOP who promised no pro-union integration and voila.
No more unions (except for ‘colored people’ as they said in the old days, who continued and still continue to organize! Like, Hispanic laborers, for example).
@DeVaul
The USA has had managed socialism since 1913. What exactly has improved for the working stiff? There are no more jobs for the working stiff that is what has improved. Some cubicle sitting dilbert jobs for some of the compliant little serfs but no more work. No productive jobs. The American is a CONSUMER. That is his or her role, pride, and place. The merkin stopped being a producer long ago. Production is so de classé it had to be shipped elsewhere.
No fancy name for a stupid political grouping changes the fact that any government under any system is just a gang of goons with more guns than the other gangs. If you wish to check the validity of this out: check the history of the national Socialists in Germany, the socialists in Italy, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the death toll of its citizens under Chinese socialism and Indian Socialism and Cambodian socialism.
Add the socialism of the Columbian gangs and the other south american socialist nations.
The new deal did NOT bring vaccinations to the masses. Private entrepreneurs developed the Salk and Sabin vaccines for polio. Private research developed the Jenner Smallpox vaccine.
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: The White House ran the March of Dimes. It was conceived by a dear friend of FDR. FDR didn’t want to agitate the GOP with yet another government program for a specific disease so he engineered the March of Dimes. Production of the vaccinations and distribution of it required the government being very, very involved.
Socialism has a sterling record of protecting workers and improving the lives of their children. Pure capitalism has a very cruel history of exploitation of labor and resources. Balancing the two forces is where wealth lies.
“This country was not founded on socialist concepts.”
Correct.
This country was founded by a group of wealthy landowners who didn’t want to pay their taxes.
Wealthy SLAVE owners. The march from slavery and very little middle class to modern socialist society was a long slog. And when unions were strong and socialism was increasing, the middle class grew greatly.
It is now being compressed into the cellar again. The gap between rich and poor has been widening since Reagan, especially in the last decade.
I guess socialism is not the issue so much as wheather US will move towards welfare state away from the current class society.
One thing I find interesting is social mobility (how much people move between social classes). There is very little social mobility in the US compared to anywhere else in the western world. That is in stark contrast with the myth of the “American Dream”.
Social mobility has IMO much do to with the quality, availability and price of education. But I see nothing of the sort discussed even though you have full leftist government at the moment.
“The most perfect political community is one in which the middle class is in control, and outnumbers both of the other classes.”
– Aristoteles –
ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ
ELAINE: Correct, JT. But education isn’t enough if even ‘educated’ jobs are outsourced, of course.
I read “just the way scientists talk” and immediately remember former Nixon counsel Leonard Garment, himself Jewish, explaining how in the secret White House tapes made public, when Nixon and Rev. Graham talk about Jewish ownership of all media, they don’t really mean it: “privately, this is the way this men talked”, he says.
http://tinyurl.com/yze3r3q
Now, I remember calling my best friend in High School “you damned greasy Paki”, when he beat me at grades or female attention. And he’d laugh, enjoying my frustration. I’d never say: “you Pakistanis will cause WWIII and destroy civilization”, for example. Some things you don’t say, unless you mean them. Not even in private.
But…Pakistan CAN start WWIII and kill us all! It is a very unstable nuclear power with very bad relations with India. Who is also a nuclear armed nation that isn’t particularly stable, either.
All of the disbelief to the contrary, it is not possible to extol trust in the science underlying the theory of global warming as being man-made and sustained in the face of new evidence that rackettering and structuring a fraud was an underlying component in sustaining the illusion of “scientific research.” The fact that many of the principals networking their celebrity such as Al Gore have and will benefit economically (big time!) once the world tax on carbon footprinting is in place is a cataclysm in the making–a financial tsunami directed against the poor and marginal members of global society.
Shame! Let the truth prevail.
-Jay Heming-Stein
Can’t agree with the climate change denial. Prudent risk management demands action. Taleb says we can’t afford climate black swans, I agree.
Well I think I can figure out why the tree rings indicate global cooling and the intruments global warming. First, a lot of the carbon pumped into the air has been sunk into the oceans, soil and plants. Second, the tree rings and instrument data could have come from different places. Third, the warming effects of carbon Dioxide is almost cancelled by the cooling effects of global dimming, i.e., incoming sunlight blocked by pollutants and water droplets collecting around them. This includes chemtrails, I mean, comtrails. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sun/
Global warming is happening on the poles of the planet. The temperature of the temperate zones has gone down but in the polar circles, it is going up.
Ice IS melting rapidly. Even if the temperatures are not colder in the middle zones. The equator is definitely heating up even as the temperate zones are not.
The main point I want to make is simple: the earth seldom has ‘stability’ at any time in the past and won’t in the future. We want the present status quo! But the status quo might not be possible no matter what we do or want to do since as far as Nature is concerned, there is no such thing.
Anyone looking at the geological record can see sudden shifts and changes as they dig down into the earth, Australia being one of the very few exceptions (very little geological changes!) but even Australia has seen many climatic changes over the eons.
Arctic sea ice cover is bigger two years in a row, but it´s younger and thinner ice.
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2009/10/official_tally_on_the_arctic_s.html
Antarctic sea ice has been getting bigger for a decade.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090421101629.htm
Which leaves us with equator is getting warmer.
Yes I agree.
And yes, polar bear populations are getting bigger.
More moisture in the air? More snowfall in the antarctic? Why the troposphere is not warming enough compared with models? Why the seas aren´t warming enough compared with models? Are the effects of green house effect exaggerated?
Something for the climate researchers to look at there from now on.
Get a fuel efficient car, solar panel, buy a smaller house, recycle and reduce pollution in the nature
I agree.
You can stop climate change by paying taxes and trading carbon credits in Wall Street?
I disagree. You have the change the way you live. No way around it. This prevents the poor nations from using their resources though, so in that way it works in your favour.
Do we have a computer model that accurately can predict all this?
No we don´t. Not even close. I´m not sure we can even measure any meaningful average temperature of the earth of present day.
Climate is getting warmer. But by how much?
No clue. Of the 1-7 degrees predicted. Take a guess. 1= nothing happens, 7=awful.
My guess 3.
And we will run out of stuff to burn before we ever can reach 6.
Good news.
We are not all going to die due to weather.
Bad news.
We are all going to die. And we are going to die using less energy than today. Happy days of free energy are over.
Repost:
“NASA Reports Hottest November This Record”
http://climateprogress.org/2009/12/17/nasa-november-hottest-on-record-hansen-stolen-emails-temperature-data-climategate/
“New evidence confirms land warming record”
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2009/pr20091218b.html
In addition, on Swifthack:
“Climate Crock Sacks Hack Attack, Part 2”
More here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/greenman3610
Also, a resource site mentioned in another thread:
http://www.swifthack.com/
And an editorial in [I]Nature[/I], which was mentioned in both videos:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v462/n7273/full/462545a.html