Baa. -- Humbug or ???

[Egon]

Pro's and cons:

[video]http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php[/video]

 

[/pine]

Pro's and cons:

Pro:...You can compost manure...

Con:...It's still manure...

 

[kidr]

"Models are unreliable" Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.

Especially when you locate sensors near AC exhausts.

 

[wawajake]

Living in the land of polar bears.....and knowing they are increasing in our province and also in territories adapting quite well...when I saw their reply on this link , I am confident they are BS on most of their supposed answers...........so baa humbug .

 

[dmccarty]

Consider the source,

Many thanks to Dr. Jan Dash, Director of the UU-UNO's Climate Portal for writing many of the one line responses in 'What the Science Says', with some edits by John Cook.

and follow the money. Interesting that they state that looking at climate trends that last thousands of years is not valid and we should only look at the short term. What bovine scat. Hmmmm....

Read Eisenhowers "Military Industrial Complex" speech, Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower,
1961

Tis interesting how only part of the speech that is ever mentioned is about the Evil Ol' Military. The other important part of the speech is always ignored which is interesting.

Here is what Ike said about the Research Industrial Complex.

Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.

But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.

The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.

Do we still have balance in the US between the private and public economy? A balance between cost and effectiveness? Do we still understand?

Ike then rightfully warns about the MIC but here is the issue of the RIC.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society

Do we really have anyone in power today who has earned the title of statesman? Has Federal power grown during that time? Is our public policy captive of the "scientific technological elite?"

Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow

Have the generations from Ike's time onward avoided spending money today that was borrowed from our children and grandchildren? How much of the current insolvency is caused by the "scientific technological elite?" Are the "scientific technological elite" setting policy that will continue what has been happening for over a half a century? Is the US already insolvent? How much debt can one assume before the poo hits the fan. Will the taxes imposed on the taxpayers to fight "climate change," which is based on research done by the "scientific technological elite", be the straw that broke the camels back or is the camel already broken but not yet on the ground?

The "scientific technological elite" and their political crony's would never state that people who question the Elites should be thrown in prison. After all, they have "truth" on their side. Why would they need to put people in jail if what they say is The Truth? The Elites would never use the power of the courts to go after people who question The Truth according to the Elites. Surely not. That would never happen.

Later,
Dan

 

[k0ua]

Consider the source, and follow the money. Interesting that they state that looking at climate trends that last thousands of years is not valid and we should only look at the short term. What bovine scat. Hmmmm....

Read Eisenhowers "Military Industrial Complex" speech, Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower,
1961

Tis interesting how only part of the speech that is ever mentioned is about the Evil Ol' Military. The other important part of the speech is always ignored which is interesting.

Here is what Ike said about the Research Industrial Complex.



Do we still have balance in the US between the private and public economy? A balance between cost and effectiveness? Do we still understand?

Ike then rightfully warns about the MIC but here is the issue of the RIC.



Do we really have anyone in power today who has earned the title of statesman? Has Federal power grown during that time? Is our public policy captive of the "scientific technological elite?"



Have the generations from Ike's time onward avoided spending money today that was borrowed from our children and grandchildren? How much of the current insolvency is caused by the "scientific technological elite?" Are the "scientific technological elite" setting policy that will continue what has been happening for over a half a century? Is the US already insolvent? How much debt can one assume before the poo hits the fan. Will the taxes imposed on the taxpayers to fight "climate change," which is based on research done by the "scientific technological elite", be the straw that broke the camels back or is the camel already broken but not yet on the ground?

The "scientific technological elite" and their political crony's would never state that people who question the Elites should be thrown in prison. After all, they have "truth" on their side. Why would they need to put people in jail if what they say is The Truth? The Elites would never use the power of the courts to go after people who question The Truth according to the Elites. Surely not. That would never happen.

Later,
Dan

Wow! thank you Dan. I never realized that was in that speech.. Talk about predicting the future!.

 

[k0ua]

Yes Bill Nye is a huckster..


Bill Nye Is A Huckster

 

[Egon]

It would seem the water trough has not yet slaked any thirst!

 

[/pine]

What's really bothersome is the fact that so many put their faith in the assumption that the best scientific minds are behind the (so called) climate change consensus...yet another group of highly respected scientific minds ( a group often regarded as the best of the best) is responsible for so many mistakes that end up with people actually dying...

It's a chilling reality one often overlooked in annual mortality statistics: Preventable medical errors persist as the No. 3 killer in the U.S. third only to heart disease and cancer claiming the lives of some 400,000 people each year.

 

[MossRoad]

It would seem the water trough has not yet slaked any thirst!

Nice! :laughing: