Opinion: Climate change is killing us
By Larry Weitzman
Climate change, a term used in place of anthropogenic, global warming (AGW, meaning human produced carbon dioxide is causing the world to warm which will cause disastrous effects to the Earth) has come to the forefront of California politics again, like it wasn’t already every other word out of a liberal politician’s mouth already. It seems that the new president pro tem, Kevin de Leon, of the California Senate has announced new proposals to “fight” global warming. As if humans think they can change the climate any better than Don Quixote can battle windmills.
You’ve heard the story, if we don’t “fight” global warming, humankind will be inundated in unnatural disasters, more storms, more intense storms, heat waves, cold snaps, droughts, famine, pestilence, disease, islands will be enveloped by the oceans, and coastal cities will be inundated by a dramatic rise in sea level and so on. Of course the only solution to “fighting” global warming is more government, more unelected bureaucracy, more restrictive laws, less choices, more taxes and a lot less freedom. And of course these same politicians have all the answers to all problems. Just ask them. But we are all willing to give up some freedom for some alleged security, right?
Larry Weitzman
While our populace has been literally flooded with potential horror stories from the mainstream media or blathering politicians of ever more intense weather events being caused by global warming, none of it is true, either in there being more frequent or more intense storms or as to a dramatic sea level rise. But like Don Quixote, politicians just see it as a way to destroy America as more restrictive laws, less choice, less freedom and more taxes are nothing more than creeping socialism. Remember environmentalists are like watermelons, green on the outside and red on the inside.
As more data and reports come out that scientists are producing selective data to fit the theory of climate change by cheery picking, more scientists are also learning that the actual data both anecdotal and scientific doesn’t support the theory. As the evidence that AGW is just not factual becomes more apparent, the proponents will become so high pitched that everything that happens will be caused by AGW, including the latest hangnail you got two days ago.
A recent story about the work of Paul Homewood published in the Telegraph of the UK showed how those scientists including the biggest fanatical proponent of AGW, James Hansen have been “adjusting” data to fit the theory. Hansen recently produced data showing historical Arctic temperatures being lower than they actually were to claim that Arctic temps are rising. This wholesale temperature fibbing was exposed by statistician Steve McIntire from a paper Hansen published in 1987. Homewood called this temp manipulation by the U.S. sponsored Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) and the government’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) the “real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.”
Munich Re, the world’s largest re-insurer, published its review of natural catastrophes in 2014. Its findings were lower losses from weather extremes and earthquakes. It noted the unusually quiet hurricane season. In fact it has been a quiet hurricane season for the last nine years. To jog your memories, shortly after Hurricane Katrina, a middle of the road class III storm, in 2005, we were told repeatedly by the climate alarmist fearmongers that hurricanes would increase in numbers and intensity and Katrinas would become commonplace. Of course they were wrong and the reason was those same alarmists had absolutely not one shred of evidence and/or data to back up such a statement. Most Katrina damage was from the failure of flood control devices.
Swiss Re, the world’s second largest re-insurer said that 2014 global disasters events cost insurers $34 billion below recent annual averages.
Studies also showed that the most expensive losses were from winter damage, not heat or storm related. Winter damages in the U.S. and Canada ranked fourth in losses. As to flood damage Professor Roger Pielke of University of Colorado says that “while the U.S. is prone to very large flood events, resulting in tens of billions of dollars in losses … the trend since 1940 is striking. As the nation has seen its economic activity expand by a factor of 13, flood losses as a proportion of that activity have dropped by 75 percent.“ Research has also shown very little evidence of increasing flood frequency or magnitude either in the U.S. or globally.
With respect to each year being the hottest ever is also misleading. According to the NASA satellite data and Remote Sensing System, last year was not the hottest, but even the claim that if it was the hottest, it was the hottest by 0.01 degrees, which puts it within the margin of error for several other “hottest” years. The attempt here by the alarmists fearmongers is to scare the public. If the temperature goes from 72 degrees to 72.01 degrees while you could say it is hotter, the truth is that it is such an insignificant increase it is hardly worth mentioning. The warmest recent year was 1998, an El Nino year which brought record rainfalls to California. Since 1998 temperatures have declined slightly notwithstanding the fact that CO2 has increased steadily by about 8 percent. So much for the validity of climate models that claim temperature increases of several degrees.
And notice how the winter weather isn’t mentioned in the same sentence as an Ice Age with respect to the Eastern two-thirds of the United States. Or the fact another boat, an Australian 207 foot fishing vessel, the Antarctic Chieftain, got stuck in the expansiveness of the Antarctic ice and had to be rescued last week by the heavy icebreaker, the U.S. Coast Guard’s Polar Star. The same thing ironically happened to a New Zealand research vessel last year studying AGW.
With respect to California’s current drought, history shows that as recently as the last several hundred years or so California had even more severe long term droughts as Fallen Leaf Lake was dry and its current 415-foot deep bottom was filled with a forest. This drought was discovered by scientists from UNR were studying a fault line under the lake. They found a stand of trees upright on the bottom. It was more evidence that California went through a megadrought for hundreds of years during what is now known as the Medieval Warm Period. Graham Kent, a scientist in the study, said it was a megadrought that lasted 200 years where precipitation was 60 percent of what we now consider normal. And we also know this megadrought was not caused by humans, SUVs, oil consumption or any other of the ridiculous claims today.
But that hasn’t stopped politicians for using an unproven theory to pass laws to fundamentally change the essence of the United States, never mind destroy the economy of California, which is their real purpose.
And for those liberal/socialists now in control of the state Legislature, it will not create jobs. If wind, solar power and electric cars were so terrific, they wouldn’t need to pass laws to make us buy them or outlaw other forms of power and cars leaving such unreliable power systems and impractical vehicles as our only choice. They would sell on their own. The fact that politicians don’t say is that they are very expensive and impractical. As put by politician and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, “Never let a crisis (real or imagined) go to waste.”
Larry Weitzman is a resident of Rescue.
Amazed LTN allowed this article on their website. Thank you Larry. Lets hear all the watermelons go nuts now.
Unfortunately, right there at the beginning he says ‘anthropomorphic’ when I think he means ‘anthropogenic’. Using the right words matters if you want to be taken seriously.
Amazingly Kae allows phonies like “business owner” who I am sure never took a serious science course, such as chemistry, physics, physiology, or meteorology above the fourth grade level to try and destroy the messenger with child like insults worthy of the ignorance they demonstrate.
Please reply with legitimate scientific thought or counter arguments and turn the debate into a real discussion.
Show me I am wrong “business owner” by telling me what di-hydrogen oxide is without consulting a chemistry textbook or a high school level science teacher.
And no, I can’t give you the definition of “is.”
Dogula,again you are a disappointment by attacking a possible spelling error and not the essence of the article. What are your thoughts on AGM?
Legal Beagle ~~
Tell the entire East Coast there is “Global Warming” oops, Climate Change isn’t that what the Geo political frauds call it now.
Wake up!!!!
The scam is long over.
The only believers are those that want to profit from it ie. algore,styre,carbon sequestration nazi’s.
You go guy!
If CO2 is really causing the warming, I’d like to see how much of the locked carbon (embedded in the earth and not the atmosphere) is naturally unlocked, and how much we are unlocking.
Maybe one of the best benefits to the focus on locked carbon emissions is quality of air issues, other wise known as air pollution.
“Business owner” my profuse apologies if I misinterpreted your comment, which I think I did. I was up at 5 AM (much too early) this morning to read Kae’s articles and you see the result.
There, their, they,re… One has to wonder about the validity of facts in a column where the author blindly accepts the context of the words presented by his spell check.
Spelling error, Beagle??? They are completely different words with completely different meanings.
Might not matter to you, if you don’t understand what either of them means. But it makes a great deal of difference to the story.
There is simply no scientific evidence in this article that supports any conclusion. And, you want to talk about others’ lack of science training? The Scientific Method goes something like this: Ask a Question, Form a Hypothesis, Conduct an Experiment, Make Observations, Do Research, Analyze Results, Draw a Conclusion. Repeat.
Just like the companies who sell cigarettes, despite the overwhelming evidence of health risk, opponents of the science involved offer nothing but doubt, and their friends profit from the doubt. All you have to do is look into the companies who support the anti-climate change “movement”.
No one ever suggested that climate change caused a hangnail, except this author. Yes, the editor at LTN “allows” all sorts of “phonies” to spew their nonsense, as befits an open and civil society. What I find quite telling is which groups always resort to insults. It is absolutely absurd to imply that there are no effects from mankind’s impact on our climate. Can we make any absolute conclusions? Of course not, but we shouldn’t just ignore it either.
Tahoe is going into a natural warm and wet period. We will see more rain than snow, and the meadows and wetlands will expand. Plenty of evidence that this occurs in cycles. Global warming is very low on my concern chart.
I’m surprised that global warming is “very low on the concern charts” of so many people. I guess they have inside information that they should share with the insurance industry and the Pentagon. They have global warming on their “high level of concern list”. But, again, maybe you could share your wisdom.
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/leading-climate-change-denier-exposed-taking-1-25-million-koch-brothers-big-oil-companies/
Just found this article, it seems to support my contentions.
Many skeptics don’t know the difference between weather and climate.
Come on people it is not that hard.
Blue jeans, what are you so worried about? The planet moves in cycles. Cycles we do not fully understand. You are sold on the idea that man has altered climate. I respectfully disagree. Geologically speaking we have been on this earth a mere blip of time. Science has some answers and theories. The entire west used to be a vast inland sea. Imagine how warm the earth was then?? Again, if man raises the mean temp of the earth a few degrees, well.. Just not too worried!! Lol.
It is “very low on my concern chart” because way back in my early “hippie” days in the 60’s this was just the thing (as well as the Vietnam War) we were drawing attention too. Nobody cared back then when something really substantially changing could of been done. Fast forward 40 years and now critical mass has been achieved. Everybody is on the bandwagon too late. Concert is over folks. Even if every country in the world got on board and did everything right starting today, until population stabilizes with 0 population growth thereby reducing resource use there will be be very little change. We are talking a 100 years or so out into the future. Therefore folks, get it while you can, live the good life and consume all the resources you can and do your part to help deplete the cause. Why save it for those who still are having 3-4 children and driving them to school in their SUV’s, refusing to use or develop mass transit. Plastic bag bans are just a feel good band-aid.
I understand weather and climate. Science can’t predict the weather, but you take the leap of faith that science can predict climate? Your ignorance is astonishing. Science is now learning that cholesterol in food actually has no impact on arterial deposits. It is hereditary. But for the last 20 years Americans have been fed a steady diet of pills and food additives to combat cholesterol. Hahaha!
Go join a commune Dale! ROTFLMAO! The human race is doomed. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4
You know I don’t believe in global warming or should I say climate change because there is just not enough hard data that can stretch back hundreds of years. The data on global weather temperatures, rain and snow fall only go back about 200 years and the earth has been around for a heck of a lot longer then that (think billions). The way the scientific data on this subject has been used is like taking data from cancer research from the last week and making conclusions from that. And like the article said the data is even being tweaked to fit the cause.
What if the earth naturally warms and cools slightly every few generations to keep nature in check? Before people moved into the forest areas non man-made forest fires happened and would clear the forest of dense brush and (as has been seen in Yosemite) would re-nourish the land with new seeds. Polar ice caps melt a little and then expand a little. It’s all part of the cycle of life.
Climate change has too much political and economical implications and the people behind it seem to care more about their pocket book and personal power then the earth. If the politicians really truly believed climate change is real then they wouldn’t be living in their large homes using energy like crazy, driving gas sucking vehicles and flying around in personal jets to speak on climate change.
Well said Tahoebluewire, they can’t get the 10 day weather forecast 100% correct but they can tell us what the earth will be like in 50 years.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4
George Carlin on the planet. Absolutely hillarious. Only 7 minutes.
I have never heard it laid out better with a very common sense approach than what I had just heard from George Carlin. Well, he is extinct now and so will we all at some point. Like I said, enjoy it all and get it while you can.
Hey Larry, don’t you have any “academic voices” about Coke, Crank or Mary Jane, because you know a lot more about those subjects then Climate Change.
But, since you are an ex-lawyer and NOT a Climatologist, I will help you out.
The fact is that the last time CO2 was at 400ppm the Ocean Levels were 60 feet higher and that was about 4 Million years ago. Four million years ago did the Oceans rise and global temperatures rise overnight, of course not.
Yes, the East Coast is cold in winter but the fact remains that 2014 was the warmest year yet recorded because of rising Ocean temperatures, heat waves in Australia, Europe, Alaska, the Western United States and the other 90% of the Planet.
As a Planet, we made progress on another gas that was causing depletion of the Ozone Layer in the Stratosphere. Scientist measured the depletion, found the cause, proposed a solution that involved phasing out certain pollutants on a global scale and now it is estimated that the Ozone Layer is recovering and will be back to pre 1980 levels in 40 years.
Just as there was a solution to Ozone Depletion, there is a solution to rising CO2 levels. And I am glad that actual Scientists and not arm chair ex-lawyers are working on the solutions.
rock4tahoe, Boom!
Since the late 80’s, I’ve been hearing how Global Warming was going to cause the polar ice caps to melt and the oceans to rise. Since the the 80’s I have regularly gone to: Santa Cruz, Cayucus, Santa Monica, Pismo Beach, Coronado, Santa Barbara and Seal Beach. There hasn’t been one iota of evidence these last 25-30 years the oceans are higher even 1 inch!
There are no plans to evacuate anything along the California Coast now, or in the next 5, 10, 15 or 20 years! Heck, Al Gore himself used the profits from his alarmist movie to buy a home a where? On the Santa Barbara coast!
So the temperature has been rising? The climate is changing? No sign of any of it along the State’s coastline!
Your research is highly suspect. If you were presented with data that show sea level has risen would you go away?
“Polar ice caps melt a little and then expand a little. It’s all part of the cycle of life.”
What about dramatic decreases in multi-year ice or long term trends.
“Science can’t predict the weather, but you take the leap of faith that science can predict climate? Your ignorance is astonishing. ”
You doubled down on your ignorance. Bold move, but it didn’t work.
The level of scientific illiteracy in this country is shocking.
Parker. We have been using Satellites with Laser technology along with ground and ocean measurements for decades now; yes actual Scientific data. These measurements show the Oceans are rising about 3mm per year. Yes 3mm is small (1/8″) but even this rate is faster the the estimated rate 4 million years ago when CO2 was at 400ppm.
Q. The evidence is all around but you have to believe in Science, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics and more; I do, you don’t. You believe the Earth is only 6-10k years old and that belief is just not supported by actual Scientific Data.
According to you, some Deity supposedly threw some stuff around and created everything and instead of actual evidence for this creation, we are just supposed to believe you and your ilk.
You want to throw stones at everyone that does not believe in the “Young Earth”, including one of the most brilliant minds on the Planet, Stephen Hawkings, fine. But throwing stones does not improve your Young Earth belief.
You should read today’s, 2/28, Debra Saunders piece in the SF Chronicle! Not exactly a right-winger or a right-wing paper.
Great piece on how people should not dare to confront Climate Change orthodoxy! And how this ‘consensus’ is merely those trying to intimidate anyone questioning the party line!
Also points out how there’s way more money to be had for those going along with the Climate Change party line, than for those questioning it!
And fact is, after a full Climate Cycle this rising tide hysteria hasn’t shown itself to have any impact on our nearest coastline. Ask Al Gore!
No Q, you oppose Science you do not “believe” in.
You oppose theories, evidence and processes that are allowed in our legal system today and you want to include beliefs that are NOT allowed in our legal system because again “you” say so.
You have studied nothing (“stuff” as you call it.)
You sound like the strangers that accost me on the beaches saying, “man I was really messed up on drugs but now I am messed up on the Lord… want to join me?” In short, no thanks because whatever you believe in Q, I am going to oppose.
In summary. Gravity is a theory too, but it is still holding you to the Earth at the speed of light. And, you are just as oblivious to how that works.
Clearly the only “BS” is between your ears and your keyboard.
I know the Admin as well. You sound like you want to do what exactly about my postings on this blog… make me “believe you.” LOL!
TTFN
“How do they know it’s not just part of the earth’s natural cycle? The answer is, they don’t”
That’s the crazy part, we know what should be expected under normal conditions and we are observing something different.
There is plenty of data out there, why don’t you cite some research? Don’t act as if you can’t find any that doesn’t support your belief because it is everywhere. NASA, NOAA, USGS, every major research group.
Duke. Clearly Q is missing a few marbles in the bag from the “If you bothered to study this stuff” line.
Beware, “stuff” might be “stuff” and that “gravity” line is classic.
Parker. You should read what Stephen Hawkings has written on the subject as well.
Debra Saunders is a conservative columnists not a Scientist.
The Anti-Scientific talking heads are using the same tactics used by Tobacco companies decades ago and are funded by the Fossil Fuel industry.
This “voice” Larry Weitzman, is not a credible source of Scientific information; Chemistry? … perhaps a little, but not Science.
Didn’t say she was a scientist! Just an interesting column on how there’s such an effort to silence any sort of dissenting opinion from the Climate Change party line. And that includes amongst scientists!
It was in June ’88 when they had the famous Congressional Hearings talking about the calamities of Climate Change. And how it had already been underway for many years. It’s 2015, and the rising tides scenario is not one that’s material-
izing in anyway that’s affecting our daily lives!
Who is “Q”?
Parker. If you would rather find interesting columns from a disbarred attorney and a talking head; both with no Scientific background. Fine, knock yourself out.
However. The Scientific community on every continent is in agreement on Climate change because of the data: The large volume of Glacial retreat worldwide, rising ocean levels, increased global temperatures, Cat 5 Hurricanes in the Northern Hemisphere in November, CO2 global levels at 400ppm, changes in biological behavior, drops in Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, and more.
When Physicist Stephen Hawking is in a room, he is most likely the smartest Human in the room And when he compares the effects of Global Warming to the Planet Venus in the future, I think Humanity should pay attention.
Humans confronted CFC’s via the Montreal Protocol in the 1980’s and the Ozone Layer is coming back… slowly. I believe Humans can confront CO2 as well.
I’m sorry Rock I wasn’t aware, so you’re a scientist?
Just like how you’re writing about what scientists are stating, Ms. Saunders, (and unlike you doesn’t make up where she gets her stories) wrote, (and you have to be a scientist to write on the topic, so again I guess you’re one?) an interesting piece. It’s about a professor who believes in the Human Caused Climate narrative! But questioned the costs associated with it. And by not 100% going along with the story, came under attack.
Now when everyone who has regularly visited the California Coast since the early 80’s, over 30 years ago, (if in ’88 they were already saying Climate Change, which would impact ocean levels had been underway for years, that works as minimal starting point) can see with their own eyes no impact, only suckers believe this study baloney.
Go ask Mr. Climate Change himself, Al Gore. He has no concerns about living on the coast!
Parked. As usual, you bring troll bait attacks back to the thread.
“No impact” on California coast; Lame. Still can’t find stuff on the internet ah? Perhaps your selective ignorance is a simple ruse. Anyway, it’s not my problem you can’t find your rear end with both hands Parked!
Stephen Hawking and Al Gore versus Larry Weitzman and Debra Saunders debating Climate Change… I’d like to see it.
Back at ya… Sure thing dude, like the next time I am goin’ to send a rocket to Mars, I’ll get a Talking Head and crooked lawyer together to build the ship man! I mean what do those know it all scientist know anyway, huh.
Rock,
High School English-you cite your source! That you don’t know High School English makes you unqualified to discuss just about any topic! Let alone name call!
Debra Saunders-cites her sources! Al Gore-I am citing! He bought an estate right on the coast! Shows you how scared he is of rising tides!
Unlike you, I passed High School English, University English AND University Science Classes! No impact on the coast in over 30 years. Period! Ask Al Gore!
You can childish name call when you get UP to Debra Saunders standards and not make things up! Where were these stories on Fox & Forbes? High School English, let alone Science, here.
But you’re welcome! I don’t mind subsidising your health care since the Obama non-recovery means you need, cause I don’t, the subsidy!
Parked. Where were the stories? You found the stories fool. You just continue to deny it. I spoon fed you the information, names and sources to you like a baby; thousands of them. Then, you decided to make trollish comments about the Writers of the Source Article from Princeton. As if you know more then they do, you narcissistic whiner.
You gave no counter statical replies, no formulas, no rebuttal to the data points. You just gave the same character attacks that you always resort to.
Oh. And how much have the Markets moved up since then anyway… I said it then and I say it now, your Economic Crystal Ball is not working; S&P hit a new high along with DOW and the Dollar; Nasdaq isn’t far behind.
America was born with subsidized Slave Labor, what’s wrong with a little subsidized Health Care? How is it that you know exactly what my my health care is or why? You don’t care about me or my family, so why bring up more troll bait? Oh, I forgot, that’s what you trolls do.
BTW, if slingin’ bait is all you want to do then here you go…
Poor baby.. do you need a rice cake or a fresh diaper Parked! LOL! ;)
Man, when you get caught making stuff up, you get very silly & childish!!
Back when having an economic debate, and I made the point of stating that one needs to take into account who was in control of the purse strings, Congress, you, Rock said, that there were all these stories on Fox & Forbes about Congress having no impact on the economy.
I ask where/when were they on Fox and/or Forbes? You can’t furnish anything, cause you made it up! Destroys your credibility right there!
But you then change the subject and talk about a Princeton study. Prestigious university! But not on Fox or Forbes, channels or websites! Thus further illustrating you made something up! And that you keep failing to own up to it, and revert to name calling, you thus dig a deeper hole for your credibility!
Plus, you fail to mention that the Princeton study was done by a long-time Democratic political operative!
Anyway, the subject at hand. I cite a story by a mainstream publication, the SF Chronicle, on how if one questions in anyway the narrative of Human Caused Climate Change, they become subject not to rebuttal, but attack. Rather than refute the story, your dialogue confirms it! Thanks!
Back in ’89 I walked down the Santa Cruz Pier. Did the same walk 2 years ago. Noted many of the same businesses still there!
They’re not evacuating, or planning to evacuate, with all this evidence from these ‘studies’ of Polar Caps melting? Leading to the crisis of rising tides? Oh, and its Paul Revere, Al Gore, even used money he made from hyping this crisis to buy a place where? Right on the coast! Extremely Ironic!!
Now what’s really ironic is that when you previously engaged in your name calling, I criticized our economy for not benefitting all income levels. You Rock, then blogged to me, ‘Sorry the recovery is passing you by.’, having no idea my financial status. (Which wasn’t the first time you made inaccurate statements about me.)
Anyway, to now discover my tax dollars are subsidizing your health care, even more-Extremely Ironic!!
Parked, still going for the ignorant wounded-duck routine with more troll bait thrown in. Ok.
WAH! “I can’t find the information on that Internet thing and it is all your fault, WAH!!”
WAH! “I can’t use the Dewy Decimal system either and it is all your fault, WAH!”
(I get over 190 million results from the sources I gave you and Forbes and Fox Business are still in the first 5 pages of news related results.)
“WAH! I can’t find fault with the report or data so I will attack the data on Political grounds, WAH!” Troll.
“I walked on a pier and it is still there, so there is no Climate Change.” Very Scientific Parked.
Sure glad my Tax Dollars are subsidizing your Gasoline, Electricity, Roads, Timber, Mines, Food, Tobacco Farms, Bridges, Wars, Vaccines, Internet, etc. Zing!
Should I get a violin out a play you a few bars? It is a pretty small one… LOL! :)
Read these words-High School English!! It’s your job to cite the source! You name call, but you are unable to cite where/when these stories were on either Fox or Forbes! Period!!
As I said before, Obama admitted he’s a failure on the economy and that Obamacare is a scam! Plus, Obama admitted Climate Change is a fraud! The story was on MSNBC. Look it up!
If you can’t find it Rock, it proves I’m right that he said it. Great logic, but I don’t believe it even passes the muster for Jr. High English.
But here, I’ll do it one better. Show me, give me the link, or the day that the story was reported on either Fox or Forbes, that the Congress has no impact on the economy, and I’ll give $1,000 to the Democratic Candidate or cause, of your choice. Or heck I’ll give it straight to the DNC.
I’ll have LTN verify the donation. Show me where this was ever reported on Fox or Forbes like you claim, and I could be giving 1k to the Hilary for Pres. campaign, Thanks to You!!
I’m putting money where my mouth is and calling you out as someone that outright makes stuff up! Don’t childishly name call, prove your claim. I have $1,000 saying you made the whole thing up! Just like the former VP who scares people about Climate Change, with one of the results being rising coastal tides, and yet he gets a place on the coast.
Anyway Rock, I’ve got $1,000 to any Democratic cause/candidate you direct it towards saying you made up that there ever was such a story on Fox or Forbes! Show me the link. Bring it!!
Hurry up, so you can then focus on fighting thru this non-recovery. Then you won’t have to rely on people like me subsidising your health care.
And no phony links! A link to a story on Fox News or Forbes that reports Congress has no impact on the economy! I’m waiting…..
Parked! I am laughing out loud since you do not understand! LOL!
Every time you use your troll bait English ploy… LOL!
Every time you use your can’t find anything in the Internet ploy, it shows your ignorance… LOL!
Every time you use your show me the link troll ploy, it verifies your ignorance… LOL!
As for your $1000 troll bait offer, this is just too much fun for me… LOL!
Did you not find last months jobs report… of course not, since you can’t find anything on the Internet! LOL!
What you gonna do now, go back to crying about your Quantitative Easing argument that flopped and started your ignorant rant to begin with… LOL!
Here, I will give you two clues:
a. There is way more the one or two links.
b. You can add a modifier to your search to narrow the results. Ex. “Democratic presidents better for economy” yields millions of results but adding a modifier to the phrase narrows the results.
Now go out a play then come back and tell everyone how you disagree with the Internet because you have a dollar in your pocket… LOL!
You don’t know Jr. High English Standards and I caught you making something up!
$1,000-put my money where my mouth is, and you can’t show where this story ever was on either Fox or Forbes, with either a link or a date, (Jr. High English here.) like you claimed it was. Got ya!
I’m sure there’s other instances where you made stuff up, but I’m too busy working to subsidize your health care. Sorry you’re like so many that the Obama Pres. hasn’t helped!
You couldn’t put up, even for $1,000 going to any Dem. Cause or Candidate of your choice! And with the stock market tanking today over the fear the Fed may end its easing program, I shouldn’t be throwing around 1k. But that’s right, it wasn’t even a concern cause I knew you made the whole thing up!
So where was this story about Congress not having any impact on the economy on Fox or Forbes like you said it was? Oh, that’s right-you made it up!! Name calling won’t bring back your lost credibility!
Park’d. The only thing “made up” are your predictions of economic doom and gloom. The only thing “lost” is the empty space between your ears… again.
Since the story never ran on the particular networks as you claimed it did, cause if you could prove your claim I’d be writing a $1k to the Dem. Cause or Candidate of your choosing, you revert to childish name calling. It’s quite sad actually!
In the early 1980’s, when I attended Meyers Elementary, the coming threat was an “Ice Age”. More fear from the climate pimps who have never been right.
Fox and Forbes is not a journal you twit. The merit of what they says does not depend on their recognition.
Sack up and address the content.
Remember the times you cited discredited scientists about climate change? You aren’t someone to look up to when it comes to sources.
Go ahead, try again, you can’t do anyone worse than 0.
Parker is also the kind of person who tries to compare deficit over decades in raw numbers without normalizing for GDP and wants to be taken seriously. Basic econ, that isn’t too much to ask.
I thought the opening was sarcasm that would eventually reveal itself as such, but then it kept going. The science is so solid about climate change that it’s not worth even ‘debating.’ However, what concerns me is Mr. Weitzman has written countless letters regarding the corruption in El Dorado County – and he has reported many facts in those. I agree the County is dysfunctional. But to write something like this makes me now question much of what he says.
Suggesting renewable power would have become more popular if it were truly “terrific” – Mr. Weitzman, you should be very familiar with how much profit-oriented corporations will spend to mislead the public (think oil companies) – I believe you are familiar with the recent “No on M-N-O campaign”? Think oil companies aren’t putting millions upon millions into convincing people to deny climate change? And, know how many tax breaks they get compared to renewable energy? Not only are they not playing by the same rules, but the oil companies also cheat.
Duke,
Fact is I didn’t make something up out of thin air, I cited my sources, wasn’t aware your Phd. was better than theirs?, I guess we can discount all scientists who get research $ cause they support the human caused/ climate change narrative, I did use normalized GDP, and when are we going to start evacuating our coasts because 30 plus years of these climate change caused rising tides are flooding all homes (including Al Gore’s) & businesses located there?
Here’s an interesting (and very short) piece. From a scientist.
http://gregmorin.liberty.me/2015/03/23/not-even-wrong/
‘And yet climate models, modeling not a mere collection of atoms in a flask but basically every atom in the atmosphere and oceans on the entire planet with orders of magnitude more variables, those models are 100% ironclad and sound and we should take their predictions to the bank.’
This guy lacks a basic understanding of climate models. Or banks on the fact that their readers don’t and they will fall for this kind of BS.
It also ends with a ‘strawdog’. No one is saying the models are 100%, that is something you say they are saying to muddle the discussion.
Do you really think this pay to play site is educating you? You are being taken.
And your sources were all garbage, one even retracted their own research (years before you cited them). Something you should have picked up. Identifying reliable sources is a basic academic skill that you lack. You claim you went to college, what happened? Punctuation is not helping your case for intellectual integrity. I understand typos but jeeeeez what was in your coffee. I like e.e. cummings too but he wrote poems.
Your intellect is compromised by confirmation bias.
Dog, Duke has it correct. Your source is ignorant of the research. The models he is referring to are trying to predict how climate and weather will actually change due to warming – not the root cause of the warming – that the settled science. The earth is warming (the oceans have absorbed considerable warmth in the last decade as example) and the root cause of that dramatic increase (which BTW – we should be going through a cooling phase based on the Milankovic Cyles, but we are warming) is driven by our obsession with fossil fuels (greenhouse gases). These are well established and your “scientists” Greg, does not even touch those facts – because he can’t. So instead he conflates the issue on purpose, or from ignorance (more likely) and notes that climate models (i.e., predictions of changing climate -not the cause) have a significant amount of uncertainty associated with them. Something that is reported in all of the studies that report them btw – in fact some researchers have at times advocated modeling averaging to accommodate the uncertainty, which can be useful sometimes.
I suggest you take a look at a couple of sites to better acquaint yourself with reality; easy reads.
http://grist.org/politics/ted-cruzs-crazy-climate-theories-debunked/
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/03/04/a-new-fake-report-on-climate-change/
Rick
Dog. Greg Morin is a Chemist who sells Aquarium Products in Georgia. Nice try.
So how do you earn YOUR living, Rock?
genius, hyperintelligent. Inventor of the internet and wd40. Swam around the world twice without getting wet. Sells sun to the bajamas and ice to the eskimos (he’s that good). If you think you knew it…you were wrong, and he knew it first.
bajamas. check book.
Duke,
Again, so your Phd. is better than theirs? Never retracted anything!
And in my psychology class in college I learned how resorting to personal attacks illustrate a lack of confidence one has in his/her own opinions!