Superjudge

Wow, you're a real prick.

What's the deal??

Benzo

Cryptic sentences about freedom of speech and things disappearing makes Scott a dull boy.

Superjudge

How was that cryptic.

It was clear as a bell.

But I'll elaborate for you.

I love freedom of speech, it allows armchair critics from both sides to bitch and complain about information so convaluted by political agenda on both sides that it cannot be used to determine much.

What can?

To me, shit I can see is worthy. I see shit disappearing pretty fast. I don't see how it's prudent to wait until political leaders can wade through ridiculous political bullshit to truly look at things as a concern.

We will though.

And shit will be bad if you ask me. And you did.

Benzo

What shit is disappearing? How is any of this freedom of speech? and are you suggesting we don't have it anymore?

Finally how can you "see" things that have disappeared?

Superjudge

Benzo.

We all know you're a badass right wing guy. The environment is a left wing cause.

Is there any point in getting all riled up over something that is so much a par tof who you are...not for me, I like you too much!

Benzo

I am not right wing at all....some of my beliefs are very very left wing.

Windex

the environment is only a left wing cause so governments can control more aspects of life (with taxes and creating more government entities)

Bill Haverchuck

1 - The National Post article is somewhat sloppy journalism. In a seperate post, I will elaborate as to why I feel this way. I will go through the article and respond to it.

2 - No "lefty" paper will cover it because there is probably not much of a story. This has a lot to do with the political bullshit SJ was eluding to in his post. The National Post appears to be inflating this story.

3 - What is your understanding of how the world warms and cools? You deny global warming but accept climate change? What do you mean? Please be more specific so that I don't have to make assumptions about your position. Do you believe that "man" is affecting the climate, but not warming the planet? Is that what you're saying? If so, in what ways do you accept that man is affecting the climate?

Windex

global warming - heats when we are close to or at summer, cools as we venture way from it
the sun has something to do with it

Windex

global warming - heats when we are close to or at summer, cools as we venture way from it
the sun has something to do with it

Belsius

The fact that the leaves are not falling for the third straight year in autumn/winter in Madrid is pretty disturbing.

Benzo

1. All journalism can be considered sloppy depending on ones bias...I can pick apart a Star or NYTimes article on any given day.

2.I think in this case they will have to pick the story up, now that reuters and online sources like yahoo etc...are on it they will have to. The political BS falls both ways if this was a story about some right wing debacle it would be all over the place and you know it.

3.Perhaps I should have been clearer on the terms. I see "Global Warming" as the trend it has become in media and politics. "Climate Change" I see as the worlds natural cycle of change not man driven. I will say it is possible that man effects climate, too what extent though, we do not know.

What I do know is that what these "scientists" have done (and remember this is NASA and CRC we are talking about) is absolutely reprehensible, and changing and deleting files once a "Request for Information" has been submitted is highly illegal, and they could face criminal charges. My prediction, and I don't know for sure, but this might just be the tip of the iceberg (pun intended).


Belsuis, there was a time in that world was covered in ice, not just leaves not falling, and man had nothing to do with it.

Bill Haverchuck

1 - Of course. But don't automatically assume "bias" has something to do with all journalism. Not all journalism has to be bias. That's the problem with too much of today's journalism, especially in the US. You've got Fox, on one hand, and MSNBC, on the other. Both are very misleading. CBC is not perfect, but it is far more balanced. Quite a bit in the print media is bias, but not all of it. There are some journalists with integrity who properly fact check.

2 - Well, if it keeps growing, maybe other outlers will pick it up. However, I think they may take a different slant because, as I will soon show, the side being told so far is misleading, and the way the info is presented is sloppy. And that's not me being "bias", that's me following a methodology I try to apply to all subjects. I look at the source and ask questions about it and scrutinize it. I do the same things to "lefties." You know I do, since I've already stated my position on other matters we agree on. I have no problem telling the hippies to grow up when they spread their 911 nonsense.

3 - Ah, the key word is extent. See, most honest climatologists will tell you, the concern is not so much about global warming, but the RATE of change in temperature. Yes, throught the planet's history there have been natural cycles, and there are SEVERAL variables that account for those natural cycles. However, the RATE at which the Earth is warming in such a short period of time belies all the arguments that try to reduce the change to "solar cycles", "Volcanic eruptions" or other natural phenomena. Rate is an important aspect of the changing trend, especially when assessing the correlation between increased CO2 levels and temperature. Thing is, when looking at short term trends, data gets skewed by sudden events, such as Volcanic eruptions or El Ninho's, and that's what the deniers prey upon.

4 - Nice pun with the iceburg comment. But I also think you're jumping to conclusions a bit. These emails are only being disclosed in pieces. An objective person would ask, why aren't they showing more than just a few lines, if they are really that damaging? We'll have to see how this plays out.

Benzo

Great post and I am going to take this section on its own...There is evidence that shows the earth is no longer warming at all, and hasn't since 1960, I will get a reference to it as soon as I get home.

Superjudge

I dunno.

Where do we get Oxygen?

Bill Haverchuck

Okay, you get that reference and I'll take a look at it. Maybe it will be new, but it will most likely be something I've already seen before.

I am taking a few notes and about to address the National Post article. I've had other work to do, so I'm multi-tasking right now.

Please, please do not link me to the "the great global warming swindle" movie, because that has been debunked a million times already and exposed as a total fraud.

lonewolfpoet

The real issue is SUSTAINABILITY, can we as a race continue to burn fossil fuels, ignore alternative energy technologies like wind power, solar and tidal power sources, cut down the Amazon, pollute the environment (air and water), treat fresh water like a renewable resource and ignore world population growth?

Benzo

Your right, the best possible cure for all the environmental woes would be to start to cull the population believe it or not.,

LX

Peer reviewed science says there is a need for immediate changes. Politics should have zilch to do with it.

The amount of money thrown at PR averting change is enormous and makes the tobacco industry look like a joke. Until I see that there is recognition in peer-reviewed scientific journal, then I suspect more fakery.

And it is sad that we need scientists to tell us what is obvious, but when you have so much money put into telling us that oil is the way forward, and that we might as well drink the stuff, then there does have to be a force to counter all that. And the people in charge of making decisions also spent decades insisting that there needed to be a clear scientific consensus.

LX

The environment recovered extremely well after the black plague when millions of people died, and immediately went into decline once the disease was eradicated.

But of course it's just about natural cycles.