Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Massive Coalition Backs Trump’s Climate Science -open thread

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    34,576
    Thanks
    5,715
    Thanked 15,145 Times in 10,539 Posts
    Groans
    100
    Groaned 2,987 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default Massive Coalition Backs Trump’s Climate Science -open thread

    There is no climate science in Cabana Poon's stupid thread.

    Get some climate science, then publish it. Should be pretty simple if it was possible.

    Oily think tank leaders, lobbyists and generic unnamed scientists are not climate scientists or climate science.

  2. The Following User Groans At Micawber For This Awful Post:

    Earl (08-26-2019)

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Micawber For This Post:

    moon (08-26-2019), reagansghost (08-26-2019)

  4. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    24,892
    Thanks
    4,196
    Thanked 15,334 Times in 9,321 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,825 Times in 2,563 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    this is all a torrent of lies and fake news

    the cultists are lapping up as usual

  5. The Following 2 Users Groan At reagansghost For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (08-26-2019), Earl (08-26-2019)

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to reagansghost For This Post:

    evince (08-26-2019)

  7. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    A massive coalition of environmental organizations, activists, and think-tank leaders signed a letter to President Donald Trump supporting the proposed Presidential Commission on Climate Security (PCCS), as well as the work of Trump climate and national security adviser Dr. William Happer of Princeton University. The campaign, which comes amid fierce establishment resistance to re-examining government “climate science,” also backs an independent scientific review of the increasingly dubious claims made in federal climate reports. Analysts say this battle will be crucial in establishing the credibility of government climate science — or the lack thereof.


    The coalition letter, signed by almost 40 leading policy organizations and well over 100 prominent leaders, argues that an independent review of federal global-warming reports is “long overdue.” “Serious problems and shortcomings have been raised repeatedly in the past by highly-qualified scientists only to be ignored or dismissed by the federal agencies in charge of producing the reports,” the leaders and organizations explained. Indeed, in multiple cases, federal bureaucracies have even been accused of fraudulently manipulating data and findings to support their politically backed conclusions.

    “Among major issues that have been raised and that we hope the commission will scrutinize: the models used have assumed climate sensitivities to CO2 concentrations significantly higher than recent research warrants; the models used have predicted much more warming than has actually occurred; predictions of the negative impacts of global warming have been made based on implausible high-end emissions scenarios; the positive impacts of warming have been ignored or minimized; and surface temperature data sets have been manipulated to show more rapid warming than has actually occurred,” the signatories wrote.


    The highly unscientific nature of the claims — many of which cannot be tested or falsified — also casts doubt on the alarmist findings contained in widely ridiculed federal climate reports. “An underlying issue that we hope the commission will also address is the fact that so many of the scientific claims made in these reports and by many climate scientists are not falsifiable, that is, they cannot be tested by the scientific method,” explained the coalition letter to Trump supporting the PCCS, which brought together many of America’s most influential environmental and conservative-leaning public policy organizations.


    Perhaps the most alarming element of the whole saga is that this supposed “science” is serving as the pretext for trillions of dollars in government spending, as well as unprecedented empowerment of governments and international bureaucracies such as the United Nations and its various agencies. The man-made global-warming hypothesis also underpins drastic policy changes that restrict individual liberty and free markets that harm everyone, and especially the world’s poorest people, for nebulous alleged benefits. As such, the science must be thoroughly reviewed, and it must be completely transparent, the coalition said.


    “The conclusions and predictions made by these reports are the basis for proposed energy policies that could cost trillions of dollars in less than a decade and tens of trillions of dollars over several decades,” the letter explained. “Given the magnitude of the potential costs involved, we think that taking the insular processes of official, consensus science on trust, as has been the case for the past three decades, is negligent and imprudent. In contrast, major engineering projects are regularly subjected to the most rigorous and exhaustive adversarial review. We suggest that climate science requires at least the same level of scrutiny as the engineering employed in building a bridge or a new airplane.”

    As The New American reported earlier this month, the establishment is in full freak-out mode over the proposed presidential commission on climate science. Far-left Democrats in Congress have slammed the idea as “dangerous.” A coalition of globalist “national security” professionals, mostly from the far-left Obama administration, even claimed reviewing the science would be a threat to “national security.” The establishment media has gone absolutely bonkers, endlessly demonizing Trump and Happer for failing to genuflect before their climate beliefs — the faith of a “climate” movement that leading experts such as MIT meteorologist Richard Lindzen have even described as a “cult.”


    The letter highlighted how bizarre this was. “We note that defenders of the climate consensus have already mounted a public campaign against the proposed commission,” the signatories wrote. “We find this opposition curious. If the defenders are confident that the science contained in official reports is robust, then they should welcome a review that would finally put to rest the doubts that have been raised. On the other hand, their opposition could be taken as evidence that the scientific basis of the climate consensus is in fact highly suspect and cannot withstand critical review.”

    Indeed, as this magazine and many other sources have documented, the alleged “science” upon which the man-made global-warming hysteria is based is highly suspect at best. Self-styled “climate scientists” have been repeatedly exposed in unethical behavior, including hiding and manipulating data that contradicts their hypothesis. The predictions of the alarmist movement have been remarkably consistent, too — for decades, they have been wrong about virtually everything. And even former members of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have blown the whistle on massive fraud, only to be ignored or demonized by alarmists.


    The nasty and vitriolic attacks on skeptical scientists such as Dr. Happer are also highly suspicious. “We further note that opponents of the proposed commission have already stooped to making personal attacks on Dr. Happer,” the letter to Trump continued, praising the Princeton physics professor who is almost universally respected in the scientific community. “Many signers of this letter know Dr. Happer personally and all are familiar with his scientific career. We know him to be a man of high capabilities, high achievements, and the highest integrity.”


    Indeed, Happer is a leading expert in this field, and is widely respected scientist even among those who disagree with him. He also happens to disagree with the increasingly discredited hypothesis that man’s emissions of CO2 — a fraction of one percent of all the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere — control the climate. “CO2 will be good for the Earth,” Happer told The New American magazine at a 2016 climate conference in Phoenix, Arizona, that brought together leading scientists and experts in various fields to expose the lies and alarmism. He added it was “pretty clear that we’re not going to see dangerous climate change” as a result of human CO2 emissions.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/...nce-committee/

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    Truth Detector (08-26-2019)

  9. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,996
    Thanks
    124,828
    Thanked 27,335 Times in 22,664 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    There is no climate science in Cabana Poon's stupid thread.

    Get some climate science, then publish it. Should be pretty simple if it was possible.

    Oily think tank leaders, lobbyists and generic unnamed scientists are not climate scientists or climate science.
    What man caused event drove the glaciers from North America and Europe 12,00 years ago?
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  10. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,996
    Thanks
    124,828
    Thanked 27,335 Times in 22,664 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    this is all a torrent of lies and fake news

    the cultists are lapping up as usual
    What man caused event drove the glaciers from North America and Europe 12,000 years ago?
    Last edited by Truth Detector; 08-26-2019 at 02:21 PM.
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Truth Detector For This Post:

    Earl (08-26-2019)

  12. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    A massive coalition of environmental organizations, activists, and think-tank leaders signed a letter to President Donald Trump supporting the proposed Presidential Commission on Climate Security (PCCS), as well as the work of Trump climate and national security adviser Dr. William Happer of Princeton University. The campaign, which comes amid fierce establishment resistance to re-examining government “climate science,” also backs an independent scientific review of the increasingly dubious claims made in federal climate reports. Analysts say this battle will be crucial in establishing the credibility of government climate science — or the lack thereof.


    The coalition letter, signed by almost 40 leading policy organizations and well over 100 prominent leaders, argues that an independent review of federal global-warming reports is “long overdue.” “Serious problems and shortcomings have been raised repeatedly in the past by highly-qualified scientists only to be ignored or dismissed by the federal agencies in charge of producing the reports,” the leaders and organizations explained. Indeed, in multiple cases, federal bureaucracies have even been accused of fraudulently manipulating data and findings to support their politically backed conclusions.

    “Among major issues that have been raised and that we hope the commission will scrutinize: the models used have assumed climate sensitivities to CO2 concentrations significantly higher than recent research warrants; the models used have predicted much more warming than has actually occurred; predictions of the negative impacts of global warming have been made based on implausible high-end emissions scenarios; the positive impacts of warming have been ignored or minimized; and surface temperature data sets have been manipulated to show more rapid warming than has actually occurred,” the signatories wrote.


    The highly unscientific nature of the claims — many of which cannot be tested or falsified — also casts doubt on the alarmist findings contained in widely ridiculed federal climate reports. “An underlying issue that we hope the commission will also address is the fact that so many of the scientific claims made in these reports and by many climate scientists are not falsifiable, that is, they cannot be tested by the scientific method,” explained the coalition letter to Trump supporting the PCCS, which brought together many of America’s most influential environmental and conservative-leaning public policy organizations.


    Perhaps the most alarming element of the whole saga is that this supposed “science” is serving as the pretext for trillions of dollars in government spending, as well as unprecedented empowerment of governments and international bureaucracies such as the United Nations and its various agencies. The man-made global-warming hypothesis also underpins drastic policy changes that restrict individual liberty and free markets that harm everyone, and especially the world’s poorest people, for nebulous alleged benefits. As such, the science must be thoroughly reviewed, and it must be completely transparent, the coalition said.


    “The conclusions and predictions made by these reports are the basis for proposed energy policies that could cost trillions of dollars in less than a decade and tens of trillions of dollars over several decades,” the letter explained. “Given the magnitude of the potential costs involved, we think that taking the insular processes of official, consensus science on trust, as has been the case for the past three decades, is negligent and imprudent. In contrast, major engineering projects are regularly subjected to the most rigorous and exhaustive adversarial review. We suggest that climate science requires at least the same level of scrutiny as the engineering employed in building a bridge or a new airplane.”

    As The New American reported earlier this month, the establishment is in full freak-out mode over the proposed presidential commission on climate science. Far-left Democrats in Congress have slammed the idea as “dangerous.” A coalition of globalist “national security” professionals, mostly from the far-left Obama administration, even claimed reviewing the science would be a threat to “national security.” The establishment media has gone absolutely bonkers, endlessly demonizing Trump and Happer for failing to genuflect before their climate beliefs — the faith of a “climate” movement that leading experts such as MIT meteorologist Richard Lindzen have even described as a “cult.”


    The letter highlighted how bizarre this was. “We note that defenders of the climate consensus have already mounted a public campaign against the proposed commission,” the signatories wrote. “We find this opposition curious. If the defenders are confident that the science contained in official reports is robust, then they should welcome a review that would finally put to rest the doubts that have been raised. On the other hand, their opposition could be taken as evidence that the scientific basis of the climate consensus is in fact highly suspect and cannot withstand critical review.”

    Indeed, as this magazine and many other sources have documented, the alleged “science” upon which the man-made global-warming hysteria is based is highly suspect at best. Self-styled “climate scientists” have been repeatedly exposed in unethical behavior, including hiding and manipulating data that contradicts their hypothesis. The predictions of the alarmist movement have been remarkably consistent, too — for decades, they have been wrong about virtually everything. And even former members of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have blown the whistle on massive fraud, only to be ignored or demonized by alarmists.


    The nasty and vitriolic attacks on skeptical scientists such as Dr. Happer are also highly suspicious. “We further note that opponents of the proposed commission have already stooped to making personal attacks on Dr. Happer,” the letter to Trump continued, praising the Princeton physics professor who is almost universally respected in the scientific community. “Many signers of this letter know Dr. Happer personally and all are familiar with his scientific career. We know him to be a man of high capabilities, high achievements, and the highest integrity.”


    Indeed, Happer is a leading expert in this field, and is widely respected scientist even among those who disagree with him. He also happens to disagree with the increasingly discredited hypothesis that man’s emissions of CO2 — a fraction of one percent of all the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere — control the climate. “CO2 will be good for the Earth,” Happer told The New American magazine at a 2016 climate conference in Phoenix, Arizona, that brought together leading scientists and experts in various fields to expose the lies and alarmism. He added it was “pretty clear that we’re not going to see dangerous climate change” as a result of human CO2 emissions.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/...nce-committee/

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    Truth Detector (08-26-2019)

  14. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    McSquawker is terrified for the PCCS to do its work, he knows that the outlandish claims made by climate alarmists will be debunked finally.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to cancel2 2022 For This Post:

    Truth Detector (08-26-2019)

  16. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    34,576
    Thanks
    5,715
    Thanked 15,145 Times in 10,539 Posts
    Groans
    100
    Groaned 2,987 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    McSquawker is terrified for the PCCS to do its work, he knows that the outlandish claims made by climate alarmists will be debunked finally.
    They don't have a job, moron. They are looking for one. They want to destroy the game because they can't win.

    Do the work, idiot. Get a hypothesis, apply for a grant, get selected, run your experiments, submit the results to a peer review committee, get published in nature, cell, science,
    or some sort of relevant high impact scholarly journal. Climate scientists are able to do that all the time. There is NO climate science anywhere that supports your positions.
    Zero. None.


    Keep Blogging though....

  17. The Following User Groans At Micawber For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (08-26-2019)

  18. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    They don't have a job, moron. They are looking for one. They want to destroy the game because they can't win.

    Do the work, idiot. Get a hypothesis, apply for a grant, get selected, run your experiments, submit the results to a peer review committee, get published in nature, cell, science,
    or some sort of relevant high impact scholarly journal. Climate scientists are able to do that all the time. There is NO climate science anywhere that supports your positions.
    Zero. None.


    Keep Blogging though....
    I post scientific papers all time you effing cretin! Oh, and climate models are not evidence, didn't anybody tell you that?
    Last edited by cancel2 2022; 08-26-2019 at 09:38 AM.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to cancel2 2022 For This Post:

    Truth Detector (08-26-2019)

  20. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

  21. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    34,576
    Thanks
    5,715
    Thanked 15,145 Times in 10,539 Posts
    Groans
    100
    Groaned 2,987 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    I post scientific papers all time you effing cretin! Oh, and climate models are not evidence, didn't anybody tell you that?
    Lie. You NEVER post peer reviewed high impact scholarly journal articles in climate science that support your positions.

    NEVER, EVER, NOT EVEN ONCE. BECAUSE YOU CAN'T. BECAUSE THERE ARE NONE.

    That is why your oily frauds want to use think tanks, and lobbyists and scientists who aren't climate scientists to attack
    instead of supplying climate science. They also have no climate science you HYUGE JOKE


    So fuck off and die, quickly, you fake pos whore.

  22. The Following User Groans At Micawber For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (08-26-2019)

  23. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    34,576
    Thanks
    5,715
    Thanked 15,145 Times in 10,539 Posts
    Groans
    100
    Groaned 2,987 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    What man caused event drove the glaciers from North America and Europe 12,00 years ago?
    12,00? smoke crack much?

    Epochal changes in global climate logically, historically and scientifically coexist with present understanding of present anthropogenic climate change.

    You can't win. You have no science. No comparisons from your "how to argue with a liberal" checklist will remedy your problem.

  24. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,996
    Thanks
    124,828
    Thanked 27,335 Times in 22,664 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    12,00? smoke crack much?
    That's all you got? Moron.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    Epochal changes in global climate logically, historically and scientifically coexist with present understanding of present anthropogenic climate change.
    LIE and LAME. There have been no "epochal" changes in the climate. It has been changing for millions of years to the warmer side of things. Better than global freezing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    You can't win. You have no science.
    WRONG: you can't win because your science is faked.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    No comparisons from your "how to argue with a liberal" checklist will remedy your problem.
    Brain dead hack.
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  25. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    34,576
    Thanks
    5,715
    Thanked 15,145 Times in 10,539 Posts
    Groans
    100
    Groaned 2,987 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    That's all you got? Moron.



    LIE and LAME. There have been no "epochal" changes in the climate. It has been changing for millions of years to the warmer side of things. Better than global freezing.



    WRONG: you can't win because your science is faked.


    Guess what. You failed again to post any peer review climate science that supports your position on present understanding of anthropogenic climate change.


    Try again!

  26. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    They don't have a job, moron. They are looking for one. They want to destroy the game because they can't win.

    Do the work, idiot. Get a hypothesis,
    You mean a theory.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    apply for a grant,
    Science doesn't need grants. Grants are not part of science.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    get selected,
    Getting select is not science either.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    run your experiments,
    Experiments are to done to test the null hypothesis of a theory. There is no other reason to do an experiment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    submit the results to a peer review committee,
    Science does not use consensus. No elite group votes on a theory of science.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    get published in nature,
    Science is not a magazine or a journal.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    cell, science,
    or some sort of relevant high impact scholarly journal.
    Science is not a magazine or a journal.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    Climate scientists are able to do that all the time.
    Climate 'scientists' deny science and mathematics.
    Quote Originally Posted by Micawber View Post
    There is NO climate science anywhere that supports your positions.
    There is no climate science. There is no such thing. Climate is a descriptive subjective word. It is not quantifiable. No theory of science can be formed around the unquantifiable.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Into the Night For This Post:

    Truth Detector (08-26-2019)

Similar Threads

  1. Massive Coalition Backs Trump’s Climate Science Committee
    By cancel2 2022 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 09-02-2019, 11:33 AM
  2. Climate science the most revered hard science in human history.
    By Micawber in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-07-2019, 02:05 AM
  3. Replies: 55
    Last Post: 10-06-2018, 09:39 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-24-2018, 11:29 AM
  5. US Government countermands Trump on climate science
    By Micawber in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 08-10-2017, 10:37 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •