Posted on 09/19/2017 1:46:48 PM PDT by Liberty7732
If we get snow, it's man made climate change.
If we don't get a hurricane for several years, it's man made climate change.
If we get a hurricane or four during the hurricane season, it's man made climate change.
If we get a mild summer, it's man made climate change.
If we get a hot summer, it's man made climate change.
No matter what kind of weather we get, it's a sign of man made climate change.
I'm all for keeping the environment clean, but as everyone here knows, this isn't about cleaning up the environment. If it was, the companies that came out in defense of the Paris climate accords wouldn't be outsourcing to the world's worse polluters.
Optimistic that a Democrat-controlled Congress would pass cap-and-trade legislation Gore lobbied for, GIM and David Blood’s old GSAM firm took big stakes in the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for carbon trading. Accordingly, CCX was poised to make windfall profits selling CO2 offsets if and when cap-and-trade was passed. Speaking before a 2007 Joint House Hearing of the Energy Science Committee, Gore told members: “As soon as carbon has a price, you’re going to see a wave [of investment] in it…There will be unchained investment.”
After all, what better way to reduce evil carbon than to make it a profitable commodity? But unfortunately for GIM and CCX investors, trading hot air credits proved just too good to be true.
Between May of 2008 and October of 2009 the CCX market value for one metric ton of carbon plummeted from $7 per metric ton to $0.10 along with the shareholders’ investment values. Losers included the Ford Motor Company, Amtrak, DuPont, Dow Corning, American Electric Power, International Paper, and Waste Management, along with the states of Illinois and New Mexico, seven cities, and a number of universities.
By 2010, GIM approximately doubled a 9.6% stake it had purchased in Camco International Ltd., a manager of products to limit greenhouse gases. But by October of that year disaster struck again. Republicans took control of the House, dashing all cap-and-capitalize hopes along with huge profit prospects for either Camco or CCX. The latter shut down operations in November of that year.
What’s all this we keep on hearing about Carbon Feces?
Should I be now collecting as much Carbon Feces as possible to Algore?
Climate Scientologists...
That IS funny
C’mon glaciers!
Let those ice sheets advance!
The scientific method most certainly DOES predict the future. The whole purpose of a well-designed scientific experiment is to establish cause and effect in such a way that other scientists can repeat the experiment and get the same result.
If you want you can call Newton's Second Law, "F=ma", a model. It can certainly be calculated on a computer. It was established as a scientific fact long before computers existed. It not only explains the past but also predicts the future; apply a force to a mass and you can expect to see a predictable acceleration.
"F=ma2" is a different model. You can calculate acceleration using this model, but you will not be performing science and it will neither explain the past nor predict the future.
Just because you "have to have models to predict the future" doesn't make those models science.
You are soothsaying with superstitious digital chicken entrails, you just want to call it 'science' so you can tell people "the 'science' is settled therefore you have to shut up and obey us."
“ It was established as a scientific fact long before computers existed.”
the problem is that f=ma is not a scientific fact. it is a model with limitation that lead to errors in predictions...
ROTFLMAO!
You really have lost it.
Explain to me how a computer model is science.
Perhaps NASA could take a page from the Nork’s playbook and ram a nuke down Old Faithful and see what happens.
You missed the memo. NASA has decided to shift its focus, which was formerly aimed toward Islam, instead toward pagans ... especially those who sacrifice virgins by throwing them into volcanoes.
Only makes sense.
They need to change the name, so they can keep the same initials, still NASA but now the North American Stupidity Alliance.
18 Sept: Daily Caller: Michael Bastasch: Former Clinton Official, France Push For ‘Carbon Tariffs’ Against The US For Leaving The Paris Accord
Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers said countries could impose a “border adjustment carbon tax,” or carbon tariff, to penalize U.S.exports for President Donald Trump’s decision to leave the Paris accord.
French ecological minister Nicolas Hulot agreed with the carbon tariff idea, echoing remarks made French President Nicolas Sarkozy during the country’s last election.
“We agree with that,” Hulot said at the “Climate Week” event in New York City on Monday, according to The New Republic...
“We are withdrawing, and we made that as clear as it can be. I don’t know how to say it any more clearly,” White House economic adviser Gary Cohn told energy ministers at a Monday meeting in New York City.
http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/18/former-clinton-official-france-push-for-carbon-tariffs-against-the-us-for-leaving-the-paris-accord/
cannot believe Drudge isn’t taking the opportunity to get this out, given the UN meeting and the Climate Week rubbish going on in NYC. this is a study by well-known GLOBAL WARMING INSIDERS, not skeptics:
20 Sept: UK Sun: ‘WE WERE WRONG’Global warming ‘can still be avoided’ as top scientists admit they were too negative about chances of saving the planet
by Tom Michael
Temperatures have risen at a slower rate than many predicted...
A study published in Nature Geoscience claims computer-generated forecasts were ‘on the hot side’ and overstated the impact of emissions...
One of the authors of the new study was Michael Grubb, professor of international energy and climate change at University College London.
He says many people – including himself – were previously convinced the damage to the environment was effectively done and could not be fixed.
Speaking during the 2015 Paris climate summit, Prof Grubb said: “All the evidence from the past 15 years leads me to conclude that actually delivering 1.5C is simply incompatible with democracy.”
But in a recent interview with The Times, he said: “When the facts change, I change my mind, as Keynes said...
Another author of the paper, Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford, said: “We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models.
“We haven’t seen that in the observations.”...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4493982/global-warming-can-still-be-avoided-as-top-scientists-admit-they-were-too-negative-about-chances-of-saving-the-planet/
They lived in the land of Make-Believe.
At some point they had to admit that the earth was not doomed.
If I understand correctly, they think it still is, but they think we have more time.
It’s still medium level B.S.
So then we agree; it is the scientific method which predicts the future and not the models.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.