Global warming crowd takes a break

[Tokey41]

Isn't the golden rule in all religions to treat others as you would like to be treated? Seems a bit contradictory to have so many religious fanatics ranting about these issues with such hostile criticism when they expect complete understanding of their side.

In all seriousness, you need to wake the hell up. I know your all probably fifty year old conservatives who don't give a damn about the planet (either because your going to die soon or your banking on Jesus coming to save you from your own negligence), but shouldn't you at least stop and consider the alternative: what if your wrong? That is, what if everything you put blind faith into turns out to be false? Not only have you screwed your friends and family, your children and their children, but you've also screwed billions of other people you don't even know.

And that my friends is the problem with religion, when it becomes harmful to others. I look at issues like this and its clear that it's lost its way. Its not about upholding the teachings of Jesus anymore, or whatever faith you may hold, the golden rule applies to all faiths. And if your not following this rule I couldn't give a damn about your opinion on religious matters because your not even following your own code of conduct. If your stopping to think about all of this you will eventually realize that not being open to the possibility of creating a more eco-friendly planet is pretentious, foolish, and selfish. Where are your core religious values? I can't seem to find any, and without them, is there really any point to having religion at all?

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Tokey41

Isn't the golden rule in all religions to treat others as you would like to be treated? Seems a bit contradictory to have so many religious fanatics ranting about these issues with such hostile criticism when they expect complete understanding of their side.

In all seriousness, you need to wake the hell up. I know your all probably fifty year old conservatives who don't give a damn about the planet (either because your going to die soon or your banking on Jesus coming to save you from your own negligence), but shouldn't you at least stop and consider the alternative: what if your wrong? That is, what if everything you put blind faith into turns out to be false? Not only have you screwed your friends and family, your children and their children, but you've also screwed billions of other people you don't even know.

And that my friends is the problem with religion, when it becomes harmful to others. I look at issues like this and its clear that it's lost its way. Its not about upholding the teachings of Jesus anymore, or whatever faith you may hold, the golden rule applies to all faiths. And if your not following this rule I couldn't give a damn about your opinion on religious matters because your not even following your own code of conduct. If your stopping to think about all of this you will eventually realize that not being open to the possibility of creating a more eco-friendly planet is pretentious, foolish, and selfish. Where are your core religious values? I can't seem to find any, and without them, is there really any point to having religion at all?

Wow, I actually agree with a portion of your statement..."What if YOUR WRONG?"

Think of how many billions of people will and are being effected by the constant waste of money put to a false theory. Think of all the government manipulation that has ultimately become a variable in the current economic climate/depression.

Imagine all the resources wasted on GCC and how it could be put to better use.

Look, just because someone disagrees with the premise of GCC does not mean that they can not be a better steward of their own portion of this world. But to mandate and apply resources to it is where the waste and corruption takes place.

As for your point on faith, I suppose that this also applies to your Faith in Science...which has clearly been proven to be filled with opposing theories...so which theory do you choose?

It's clear the climate will change, it will get hotter and colder and as in all things living, at some point...the cycle of life on this planet will come to an end. As much as we as humans like to believe we are all powerful, the reality is that we are simply enjoying the ride while we are here.

This push for "Environmentalism" for the sake of saving the planet is a croc and at best a passive aggressive form of manipulation.

Conservatives believe in taking care of the environment as a personal responsibility to pass something along to the next generation and so on.

We actually believe that each of us has the ability and the knowledge to do the right thing and that given the choice we will actually do the right thing...however when government and others decide to push and force mandates, then our will to live in freedom takes over and rebel against the establishments.

Go figure, the "Green" community has become the establishment and they are living a life based on a lie that only fuels the bottom line pocket books of "The Man"

In order to support a better environment, then influence private individuals and organizations to lead by example, but keep the Government out of the business of "Regulations" - they only do what's so-called popular so that they can attract votes and gain or remain in power, so that they can ultimately gain more wealth.

Again, GCC is occuring, allways has and allways will...that is the evolution of our planet. There a multitude of variables that effect GCC and sure each variable can be changed to ultimately change the direction of the GCC...but in the end, it will continue and there is nothing we can do to stop the demise of this planet.

So, let's stop wasting time, money and whatever resources to this issue that can't be stopped, and start putting our efforts to restoring our economy based on sound capatilism fundamentals. Let's create wealth, through hard work and let's apply this wealth to areas less fortunate, throughout the world.

Perhaps help the people in Africa learn how to tap into their own environment and end famine in their area through development and growth of economic resources.

As you can see, it's not necessarily about who's right or who's wrong, but rather how can we as a people find ways to work together to create a better world for both ourselves and others. How do we influence the harmony to work together, simply because we desire too, rather than being commanded to do this or that.

At the end of the day, we have one issue that destroys all efforts from either side...we have to deal with each other as people, as individuals and we have to find ways to sort through conflicts of ideology.

My friends, dare I say, that these conflicts have not be resolved in nearly 10,000 years and I doubt that they will be resolved over the next 24 hours. Perhaps each one of us, including me, can go home tonight and think about one thing that each of us can do of our own desire to make this a better place.

If that fails, then I always have some weeds in my yard that need to be removed...I'm sure that would help the environment, so you "Green-Czars", your welcome to come over and clean up my own residential environment...oh, and I have 3 dogs who leave some nasty stuff in the backyard...could you remove those while your at it...it sure would make for a cleaner environment :-)

[Tokey41]

QUOTE]Think of how many billions of people will and are being effected by the constant waste of money put to a false theory.[/QUOTE]

The best thing a scientist can do is be wrong, especially when it comes to global catastrophe. I think proving global warming wrong would be a victory for both sides.

Look, just because someone disagrees with the premise of GCC does not mean that they can not be a better steward of their own portion of this world. But to mandate and apply resources to it is where the waste and corruption takes place.

Well said, except your last sentence. People need a reality check because it's obvious that collectively we aren't doing enough. America as the world's biggest polluter, along with China, in particular need to be more receptive to these ideas. It's important to note I'm not just talking about this in relation to global warming, if you truly want to help the economy there are in fact environmental endeavors you can pursue.

As for your point on faith, I suppose that this also applies to your Faith in Science...which has clearly been proven to be filled with opposing theories...so which theory do you choose?

I am curious as to where you can see 'faith in science' in my argument? I am a Christian, but of course I see the merits in science. The difference is my faith in science is in good hands, that is, I know they have a code of ethics to follow. My question to you is, where have the religious ethics gone?

It's clear the climate will change, it will get hotter and colder and as in all things living, at some point...the cycle of life on this planet will come to an end. As much as we as humans like to believe we are all powerful, the reality is that we are simply enjoying the ride while we are here.

The thing is you don't believe we are affecting this process and I do, but let's forget that for a second. Will it come to an end? Of course. Are we exponentially increasing the rate in which we come to this end? If there is any indication that this might be possible, don't we as Christians have a moral obligation to try and slow it back down? At least until proven otherwise, that is of course, the argument that creationists use, isn't it?

This push for "Environmentalism" for the sake of saving the planet is a croc and at best a passive aggressive form of manipulation.

Why is that a croc? Isn't environmentalism for the sake of environmentalism a noble cause in itself? Even if your as stubborn as dude here, recycle your cans, why not? What does it hurt? Freedom of choice? If you want to go that route then your eventually going to find yourself questioning the laws that are already in tact and wondering why they are hindering that freedom of choice as well. American ideology can be so stubborn sometimes.

Again, GCC is occuring, allways has and allways will...that is the evolution of our planet. There a multitude of variables that effect GCC and sure each variable can be changed to ultimately change the direction of the GCC...but in the end, it will continue and there is nothing we can do to stop the demise of this planet.

I just don't know what to tell you if you truly believe that. It's such a defeatist attitude.

So, let's stop wasting time, money and whatever resources to this issue that can't be stopped, and start putting our efforts to restoring our economy based on sound capatilism fundamentals. Let's create wealth, through hard work and let's apply this wealth to areas less fortunate, throughout the world.

Capitalism is part of the problem (and here come the tomatoes). It's an unrealistic ideology that relies on infinite resources to a finite planet. For example, surely even the most hard nosed conservative would agree that fossil fuels aren't infinite. How will this effect the economy? In this sense, shouldn't limiting fossil fuels until we find alternative sources be a priority not just for environmental purposes but the economy as well?

Furthermore, if you want to talk about wasted money let's talk about the amount America (and granted every other country, but the U.S is the best example here) spends on its military per year. Now, you have used the example of feeding the starving people of Africa, but let's take into account that even 1/8 of that budget would be enough to feed the entire world's starving population.

As you can see, it's not necessarily about who's right or who's wrong, but rather how can we as a people find ways to work together to create a better world for both ourselves and others. How do we influence the harmony to work together, simply because we desire too, rather than being commanded to do this or that.

I agree with what you are saying here but if you go back to the quotes I've listed you can see that you've already given up. And why? Because now someone is "commanding" you to make the world a better place? I guess you may not agree with how they are going about it, but I never said I do either. Now my question to you is, environmentally (and not just from a capitalist view), how would you make the world a better place?

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Tokey41

QUOTE]



I agree with what you are saying here but if you go back to the quotes I've listed you can see that you've already given up. And why? Because now someone is "commanding" you to make the world a better place? I guess you may not agree with how they are going about it, but I never said I do either. Now my question to you is, environmentally (and not just from a capitalist view), how would you make the world a better place?

To me it's quite simple, I take care of my area and build relationships with others around. In those relationships, I hope to be of some influence that helps them better their area, and likewise, I hope to learn from those relationships to better my own area.

My issue is very much regarding Government Control. This to me is the biggest problem and the greatest potential to ruin the environment as we know it.

As for you point on Military spending...like everyone, I would love to spend zero on the military, unfortunately, that is not a safe reality. It is clear that we have individuals who are flat out evil. Sometimes, these individuals get together to form a mass...they then go out and cause problems amongst peace loving nations. In some cases, they simply hide out in their own boarders and abuse the very people they are suppose to protect.

America has shown over and over, that they defend freedom, when ever and where ever it is needed.

As it is, the enemy is not and has not ever shown itself to be willing to talk through it's hatred...rather they manipulate their hatred and destroy lives...for that matter, one could argue that they also destroy the environment as this is the least of their worries. They simply want power.

Now when it comes to the issues that we see common in Africa and other parts of the world with regards to food...we know that throwing money at the problem is wrong, if that is all we do.

We must provide resources and relationships, while also be mentally and emotionally strong enough to help those who want the help and to not get caught up in enabling those who just want handouts.

In other words, teach these regions how to set up their own economies, how to trade, how to fuel their own survival and ultimate prosperity.

The old saying, give a man a fish and he will eat for a day...teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.

My desire would be to help communities enrich themselves, rather than waste time and money on GCC and other environmental issues through Government intervention.

Truth be known, as much as a Government is needed, the only thing it is and should be there for is National Defense as well as a Police force to stop criminals. Outside of that, it is the responsibility of each of us as individuals to meet the needs of society...be responsible for ourselves, our families, our circle of influence. Then provide support, as private individuals, not as a government for others who are in need to the best of our abilties.

Too many of us, rely on our government to do these things, and we just walk away as if it's not our responsibility anymore.

Government has become the huge entity that is filled with corruption and they are feeding on the emotions of the needy and the emotions it stirs up in others with a guilty conscious.

Now you say that I have a defeatest attitude...but rather to the contrary...what I despise is the manipulation that is used by the GCC and Environmentalist crowd. They are rather defeating and it's a major hot button for me...perhaps it's dealing with my mother issues, who also uses guilt and manipulation and quite frankly it pisses me off.

What I believe is that this crowd has and continues to exagerate the numbers. I don't believe that separating my trash does anything other than waste my time...so I am against recycling. But, as I live this way I am painted as some type of monster.

I happen to like driving a gas guzzler, when I need the added power...I also drive a car that is fairly effecient at some 36 MPG, which serves its purpose.

But much of those decisions are based on financial issues.

So create cars that are efficient and low-cost...why would anyone want to pay more for a "Green" solution, when the regular solution performs just fine?

So there you have it...don't raise prices on standard solutions, but rather offer alternative "Green" solutions that are equally if not more reliable and actually cost less than the standard solution.

Naturally, people would choose to move towards a "Green" solution...at the end of the day, most people make decisions based on the bottom line...not because they are greedy, but because it's the budget that we live under.

[DirkFTW]

Isn't the golden rule in all science to keep all hypotheses on the table until they have been proven wrong? Seems a bit contradictory to have so many fanatics ranting about skeptics with such hostile criticism when they expect complete understanding of their scientific theories.

In all seriousness, you need to wake ... up. I know you're all probably fifteen year old narcissists (you're not?) who don't give a damn about the unforeseen consequences of changing the energy use of 6 billion people (either because your adolescent brain can't extrapolate beyond the now or because you're banking on the genius of mankind which has never ever created a flawed solution to a previous problem. ever.), but shouldn't you at least stop and consider the alternative: what if your wrong? That is, what if your tiny project with tiny consequences/byproducts gets multiplied to create 6 billion people's worth of consequences and byproducts? Not only have you screwed your friends and family, your children and their children, but you've also screwed billions of other people you don't even know.

The heart is a nice touch, but I don't think it's enough.

For instance, the automobile and its use of carbon energy came at an age when...:

“In New York City alone at the turn of the century [ed.- 1900 not 2000], horses deposited on the streets every day an estimated 2.5 million pounds of manure [ed.- SHI*T!]and 60,000 gallons of urine, accounting for about two-thirds of the filth that littered the city’s streets. Excreta from horses in the form of dried dust irritated nasal passages and lungs, then became a syrupy mass to wade through and track into the home whenever it rained. New York insurance actuaries had established by the turn of the century that infections diseases, including typhoid fever, we much more frequently contracted by livery stable keepers and employees than by other occupational groups, and an appeal to the Brooklyn Board of Health to investigate resulted in the institution of new municipal regulations on stables, compelling more frequent removal excreta and disinfecting of premises. Medical authorities stated that tetanus was introduced into cities in horse fodder and that an important cause of diarrhea, a serious health problem among children at the time, was ‘street dust’ consisting in the main of germ-laden dried horse dung. The flies that bred on the ever present manure heaps carried more than thirty communicable diseases... About 15,000 dead horses were removed from the streets of New York each year.”

- James Flink, The Automobile Age (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1993), p. 136.

This is a scene from an old movie, but the gist of it is "I hate manure!"

Well now, that savior of old is the new harbinger of doom. So, don't blame me for being less enthusiastic about man's ability to create a completely clean, by-product-free, consequence-free solution for the entire planet Earth. But, I don't know, maybe we're smarter now than we've ever been before?

Hi, remember me? I invented the helicopter, the tank, and solar power... in the 1490's.

Oh snap.

[Tokey41]

In all seriousness, you need to wake ... up. I know you're all probably fifteen year old narcissists (you're not?) who don't give a damn about the unforeseen consequences of changing the energy use of 6 billion people (either because your adolescent brain can't extrapolate beyond the now or because you're banking on the genius of mankind which has never ever created a flawed solution to a previous problem. ever.), but shouldn't you at least stop and consider the alternative: what if your wrong? That is, what if your tiny project with tiny consequences/byproducts gets multiplied to create 6 billion people's worth of consequences and byproducts? Not only have you screwed your friends and family, your children and their children, but you've also screwed billions of other people you don't even know.

If I'm wrong the consequences sure as hell won't be as bad as if your wrong. It's this type of idiocy that gives America its bad name, ignoring the subject completely, but at least you threw in some pretty pictures there. The perspective of this board only makes sense on an economic level, and even then, completely shortsighted. There are other perspectives to consider and none of you have given a thought towards any one of them.

facepalm ... as in I don't know how else to respond to:

Awesome. I really didn't expect anyone on this board to agree, but the insults are definitely a bonus.

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by Tokey41

There are other perspectives to consider and none of you have given a thought towards any one of them.

What is this "other perspectives" you speak of? Jesus is coming soon and we're all going to die anyway, what else is there to think about?

[DirkFTW]

Originally Posted by Tokey41

If I'm wrong the consequences sure as hell won't be as bad as if your wrong.

Really? What part of "miracle cars which saved us from pestilence create the global warming crisis" did you not understand? I guess in 30 years when all our clean water supplies are contaminated by acid from trillions of old, corroding batteries, it'll be totally unrelated. Or when our landscape is peppered with windmills that completely alter wind and weather patterns, it'll also be totally unrelated. It's not like Ford and company said "yea, all that exhaust is gonna really screw up the environment, but ah f*#k it."

The perspective of this board...[is] completely shortsighted.

You're also on this board, so either this encompasses you, or you've just smoovly pulled a silk. Look, some people don't believe humans could have affected global temperatures, so global warming is just a myth. However, I tend to appreciate that we as humans can have a significant impact on the world, so we should tread very carefully... especially given our track record of manure piles, carbon-reliance, over-farming that led to a dust bowl, nuclear waste/Chernobyl, etc. If we're so powerful as to have caused the end of the world through global warming, then we're also powerful enough to cause the end of the world through whatever half-assed solutions we slap together without enough thought.

Furthermore, you calling me "short-sighted" for wanting to make sure we don't make a bigger mess fixing our current mess is truly rich. I guess you can always say "Oh man, we didn't know!" when your solutions drive us off a different, unforeseen cliff.

There are other perspectives to consider and none of you have given a thought towards any one of them.

GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!

Oh wait, you're wrong.

Awesome. I really didn't expect anyone on this board to agree, but the insults are definitely a bonus.

Yea, sorry, we fifty-year old conservative religious fanatics who only care about screwing the planet as much as possible before Jesus comes tend to be an ornery bunch.

[dude1394]

You are right tokey41...that IS the problem with religion. The religious zealots want to control any and everything on the planet, telling you what you can/cannot purchase, what it will/will not cost and what you can/cannot use to make a living.

They want control of every lever of commerce so they can dole out favors to their zealots and punish those who do not believe in them.

If they wanted to cut carbon then RAISE TAXES ON CARBON!!! But then they wouldn't be able to give out favors and cutouts for their brethren and they would actually have to be accountable for reduced livlihood that will be manifested once they make everything on the planet more expensive.

But don't question their faulty data or you will be labeled a heretic.

You have the religious part correct, but you are looking at the wrong side.

[alexamenos]

^^^Somebody (Tokey) is begging for a face palm response.

[Tokey41]

Originally Posted by alexamenos

^^^Somebody (Tokey) is begging for a face palm response.

I don't know what that means... I'm just stating my views on the matter in a far less hostile manner than the previous position has been stated. If I'm one of those people who you think is saying, "I can save the world", I'm ready to be shot. At least it will be quicker than watching this process.

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by Tokey41

I don't know what that means...

facepalm ... as in I don't know how else to respond to:

....your all probably fifty year old conservatives who don't give a damn about the planet (either because your going to die soon or your banking on Jesus coming to save you from your own negligence)...

[u2sarajevo]

Honestly I think the whole global warming thing is being pushed (loudly) by a bunch of opportunists, some to make a quick buck. But I also can see that we as a whole should be more responsible with this world that God has given us.

Worst case scenarios on both sides would be: if it's not true and we have needlessly spent alot of money, if it is true and we don't do anything about it we have harmed our home (possibly beyond repair). Taken both sides, at least if it's not true but we did do something we have a cleaner planet... right? But I think what we are doing now is sufficient. I recycle. I turn off lights when not needed. I unplug appliances that aren't being used.

Don't tax me into a poorer state because you are convinced about something you can't prove 100%. And don't ignore the fact that we should be responsible with the world that we have been given. Honestly I think that most people do that already.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Let's just invent super-powerful yet clean rockets that can move the earth closer to or farther away from the sun as needed.

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by 92bdad

"Truth be known, as much as a Government is needed, the only thing it is and should be there for is National Defense as well as a Police force to stop criminals. Outside of that, it is the responsibility of each of us as individuals to meet the needs of society...be responsible for ourselves, our families, our circle of influence. Then provide support, as private individuals, not as a government for others who are in need to the best of our abilties."

BINGO

Most people couldn't sleep at night though, not knowing that IF they screw up -- the government wouldn't bail them out. They have nothing to hang onto, and EXPECT the government to bail them out of any mess, regardless of what caused the mess.

Unemployment, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Farmers programs, etc....all just government welfare. Add to it the jobs created by having these programs, and you have the masses wanting to be sheeple to the government as they cannot sleep at night with all the "what ifs".

[alexamenos]

1. (for sake of argument) CO2 emissions cause global warming, a problem which must be solved -->
2. Humans and other animals emit CO2 w/ their every breath, hence human life is a threat to the environment -->
3. Human life, or limitations thereon, must be part of any serious effort to control CO2.

^^^Inexorable logic??? Nah...no way that anyone will ever go there....

hmmmm.....

Population control called key to deal

COPENHAGEN: Population and climate change are intertwined but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming, according to Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC)...

...Many studies link population growth with emissions and the effect of climate change.

"Calculations of the contribution of population growth to emissions growth globally produce a consistent finding that most of past population growth has been responsible for between 40 per cent and 60 percent of emissions growth," so stated by the 2009 State of World Population, released earlier by the UN Population Fund.

...studies have also shown that family planning programs are more efficient in helping cut emissions, citing research by Thomas Wire of London School of Economics that states: "Each $7 spent on basic family planning would reduce CO2 emissions by more than one ton" whereas it would cost $13 for reduced deforestation, $24 to use wind technology, $51 for solar power, $93 for introducing hybrid cars and $131 electric vehicles.

The dystopian possibilities of world-wide governmental control of human breathing extend far beyond economic questions...

[Arne]

http://www.cfact.org/a/1652/Monckton...on-Climategate

A must see.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Arne

http://www.cfact.org/a/1652/Monckton...on-Climategate

A must see.

He's a heretic, he will be burned at the green stake.

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by Arne

http://www.cfact.org/a/1652/Monckton...on-Climategate

A must see.

Lord Monckton is obviously someone highly opposed to *book larnin* and he's also probably convinced that Jesus is returning soon so it doesn't really matter what we do.

[alexamenos]

global scamming

the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.

Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world’s land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

So...

1) the Hadley Center is only using data from a small fraction of the available Russian stations;
2) the stations which are not used in the temperature survey were not omitted because of a lack of data;
3) the data in stations NOT included in the survey do not show any discernable warming trend;
4) the data included in the survey are from stations located in populated areas which are widely understood to be warmer than non-populated areas.

Let's take another stab at the scientific process per the CRU....

1) Claim hypothesis is proven and beyond question;
2) Cherry pick data to create scarey graphs that will scare the bejesus out of people
3) Fight like hell to keep other people from seeing the raw data;
4) Say that anyone skeptical of the scam...errr....science is an anti-book-learning jesus freak who works for an oil company and wants to kill puppies.

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by alexamenos

global scamming



So...

1) the Hadley Center is only using data from a small fraction of the available Russian stations;
2) the stations which are not used in the temperature survey were not omitted because of a lack of data;
3) the data in stations NOT included in the survey do not show any discernable warming trend;
4) the data included in the survey are from stations located in populated areas which are widely understood to be warmer than non-populated areas.

Let's take another stab at the scientific process per the CRU....

1) Claim hypothesis is proven and beyond question;
2) Cherry pick data to create scarey graphs that will scare the bejesus out of people
3) Fight like hell to keep other people from seeing the raw data;
4) Say that anyone skeptical of the scam...errr....science is an anti-book-learning jesus freak who works for an oil company and wants to kill puppies.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up.

<edit>
This is basically exactly what they said on Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura. Cracked me up.

[alexamenos]

Politics >>>>> Science....every freaking time and sometimes quite literally.

non-sequitor

Berkeley High School is considering a controversial proposal to eliminate science labs and the five science teachers who teach them to free up more resources to help struggling students.

The proposal to put the science-lab cuts on the table was approved recently by Berkeley High's School Governance Council, a body of teachers, parents, and students who oversee a plan to change the structure of the high school to address Berkeley's dismal racial achievement gap, where white students are doing far better than the state average while black and Latino students are doing worse.

[Arne]

The Southern Avenger on the dynamics of left-wing/right-wing identity as it relates to global warming.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=31091

[dude1394]

From a friend of mine..

Related: Last summer, I loosely followed the story about a search team who were taking a ship though the Northwest Passage (much of the ice had melted). They had two goals: 1) get through the passage. 2) research the wreck of a ship that went through in 1848

When the news was interviewing the head of this search team, the News Anchor was trying to make the story focus on the Arctic ice melting, “never happened in the history of the world, global warming, etc, etc” The head of the search team, said “Well, we are going after a ship that went through the passage 160 years ago, thus the passage was melted at that time as well”. Fun to see the News Anchor with slack jaw and dumbfounded look…

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by dude1394

From a friend of mine..

Related: Last summer, I loosely followed the story about a search team who were taking a ship though the Northwest Passage (much of the ice had melted). They had two goals: 1) get through the passage. 2) research the wreck of a ship that went through in 1848

When the news was interviewing the head of this search team, the News Anchor was trying to make the story focus on the Arctic ice melting, “never happened in the history of the world, global warming, etc, etc” The head of the search team, said “Well, we are going after a ship that went through the passage 160 years ago, thus the passage was melted at that time as well”. Fun to see the News Anchor with slack jaw and dumbfounded look…

Never let reality get in the way of a good fantasy...

[kg_veteran]

Common sense is a scarce commodity, it seems.