If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
CRUZ or LOSE!Posted on 03/23/2015 2:06:11 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
The war of words over climate change is getting blisteringly hot between Gov. Jerry Brown and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, with the Republican presidential candidate blithely dismissing the Democratic governor as one of those “global warming alarmists” who relies on ridicule and insult.
A Brown campaign strategist shot back Monday that the “factually irrational” Cruz is apparently now determined to “stand out from a pack of troglodytes in the GOP race for the White House.”
The public slap down — and the dis of Brown — came as Cruz formally announced his run for the White House at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., becoming the first Republican to jump into the 2016 race.
Cruz was responding to Brown’s statements on “Meet the Press” Sunday, when he launched into a verbal beat down of Cruz when asked about the senator’s recent observation that in New Hampshire, there was “snow and ice everywhere,” more evidence that “there’s been zero warming.”
“That man betokens such a level of ignorance and a direct falsification of the existing scientific data,” Brown told host Chuck Todd. “It’s shocking, and I think that man has rendered himself absolutely unfit to be running for office.”
Cruz shot back, telling Sirius XM radio’s “Breitbart News Sunday” that “global warming alarmists” like Brown “ridicule and insult anyone who actually looks at the real data,” and engage in “ad hominem attacks.” Cruz insisted global warming isn’t happening, even though “apocolypic computer models said we should see substantial warming.”
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Well, it looks like The Five moderates are getting their panties in a knot...I don’t know who was his speech writer is but...he has unrealistic goals...he not ready for prime time...his fellow senators don’t like him...just what we need another guy who wasn’t born here...maybe after eight years he will be ready.
Fair and Moderate.
I’m glad we agree.
I am also delighted by Ted Cruz’s and statements on climate change.
Namely that it’s a bunch of B.S.!!
Hahahaha! I knew it!
Yes, the modelers and their predictions! What nonsense.
J hold a doctorate in statistics and know more than most anyone about modeling and especially poor modeling and poor sampling.
Thanks for the post.
CRUZ or LOSE!Because the SF vote is so key to Republican success....../s
Who does have it “right” on climate change?
Quoting phony statistics, and citing bogus “science” that does not stand up to scrutiny or any replication of results, certainly does not make anybody “right”.
Now, nobody denies that climate can and does change, and in fact, may be in the middle of just such a change right now. But there are such a multiplicity of reasons that can affect that change, that to single out one or two factors in the atmosphere as the culprits and cause agents, is to boggle the mind, or a rational mind, anyway.
Carbon dioxide, and even methane, are present in such minute quantities, it is similar in scope to say that a mosquito sitting on an elephant’s back is in control of the elephant. For the most part, the elephant doesn’t even know the mosquito is there, and wouldn’t respond to whatever command from the mosquito in any circumstance.
Neither carbon dioxide nor methane has even a tiny part of the effect that water vapor has on atmospheric heating and cooling, because of some very peculiar characteristics of water. Water has a “triple point” at which it may exist simultaneously as a solid, a liquid, and a gaseous vapor, none of which applies to either carbon dioxide or methane under normal earth conditions of temperature and pressure. It is this “triple point” and the fact that in its solid state, ice can float on liquid water, because it has a LOWER density as it becomes solid, that accounts for virtually all the weather phenomena we are acquainted with.
There is a whole compendium of scientific study that deals with the physical states of water and its effects, and the thermal effects as it changes from one state to another, making water a wholly unique substance, and apparently insufficiently appreciated by these “scientists” that claim that mankind has much of an effect on the vast expanse of nature even as it exists just on planet earth.
Climate change is vastly more complex than these simpletons make it out to be, and certainly, no amount of taxation or regulation is going to have any appreciable effect one way or another.
No, the lines are not data sets, they are the predictions of the computer models that are the only “proof” that human activity is causing global warming. The point of the chart is that the prediction of those models has been falsified by actual empirical data, and thus the theory behind them should be rejected.
The undoubted fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that burning fossil fuels releases CO2 is about as useful for long-term climate prediction as general relativity (or its approximation by Newtonian gravity) is useful in predicting the behavior of a feather dropped from a great height in the earth’s atmosphere.
One day, in the distant future, our Big Bright Daddy in the Sky will start to fade. From then on, we will get cooler and colder and then freeze to death. This process will take a long time but, just as now, we will not be able to do anything about it.
Our Earth is in the Sun’s atmosphere and, like it or not, we have to live with warming and cooling or whatever else the Sun gives us. That’s all Folks.
Regards SD!,
Bat
Ah! The Universal Solvent!
Glad to hear that. Mo more McCains, No more Romneys!
What sane person would think that you could average 100 incorrect predictions
in order to come up with a correct prediction?
The next time a hurricane forms, go to the weather channel
and look at the computer models that try to predict
the wind speed and the forward speed and the land fall.
The predictions are “all over the map”, literally.
You can not average the failed predictions
and expect to derive an accurate prediction from that.
Those “other datasets” are the GLOBAL WARMING PREDICTIONS PROVED FALSE.
The graphic is an exercise in silliness, which is what “Global Warming” has become. They dug their own graves with outrageous predictions of warming.
Now we just rub their noses in it. Fun!
Temperatures have been increasing, so has the level of CO2 in the atmosphere - since the end of the last ice age. That mankind has risen in population during the current interglacial period is a coincidence. Correlation =/= causation.
Rent-free.
In their heads.
LOVE IT.
The computer models do not agree.
Pick one of the following reasons:
A-The models are faulty.
B-The data is faulty.
C-Both A and B.
But somehow they believe that by averaging 100 wrong answers
that they can come up with the right answer.
I will never again allow the hard left to choose our conservative candidate without a BIG fight from me!!! McCain, then Romney....now they want us to choose Jeb Bush??? Never again!!!!
You are going off The NarrativeTM by showing Satellite and Balloon Data set averages on the chart you displayed. This is unacceptable.
We Carbon Credit Exchange Founders ... er, make that, Anthropogenic Global Climate Change Experts need to follow The NarrativeTM to the letter as published in our AGCC guidebook, which you were issued at the initiation ceremony at one of my mansions.
We are discouraged greatly at this misstep and believe you may need rehydration... perhaps 200 gallons of Kool Aid will do for now.
Namaste,
Al Gore
p.s. Ohhhhh YEAH!!!
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.