Home Forums Sasquatch Forum O/T: Climate Change hoax?

This topic contains 236 replies, has 20 voices, and was last updated by  Knobby 1 hour, 44 minutes ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 237 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #160109

    Knobby
    Moderator

    Michael H, the laugh is on you. Sorry, but you’re the victim of a con.

    Amy, where there is well meaning confirmation bias in conservation science, there has been some outright fraud too. I remember years ago climate alarmists pointing to a study (with glee) of a drastically receding glacier that later got exposed as someone making up the figures.

    To aid in increased temperature readings untold numbers of rural temperature reporting stations were removed, leaving mostly reporting stations in cities. Cities tend to be slightly warmer than rural areas and helped show an increased temperature over previous decades.

    There was a case of improper numbers crunching exposed by a whistle blowing climate scientist who then become a target himself of other scientists.

    I understand wanting to make data fit what you think it should. During a test I was taking in a college biology class I knew the rotation in the cell I was observing in the microscope was moving in the opposition direction than the professor had taught in class. I was tempted to record what I knew the professor would grade as the correct answer. But I went to the professor during the test and told him my dilemma. The only words out of his mouth was “report what you observe.” In science you have to stick to the facts.

    The biggest fraud is politicians who have politicized science to the point that scientists themselves have to be careful not to torpedo their careers by contradicting the politically correct view. So, Amy, I’m certain the well meaning self-deluded scientist your piece proposes is true, but as a side someone with that mindset may feel justified in fudging or unreporting contradictory data for political expediency (to protect themselves).

    I’ve heard that saying thrown at me in person before, the one that Michael used about 97% of scientists in agreement over man made global warming when, as I pointed out in my post to Michael, its made up. The majority of the papers reviewed to reach that conclusion did not state an opinion on the cause. But those deceptive climate alarmists reasoned that because they didn’t say man was not the cause then those papers were somehow in agreement.

    Michael, I hope you got educated on something you’ve accepted but don’t examine yourself. You said the whole world is laughing at the USA. I assume that involves Trump pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord. Well, it seems in your 97% comment the laugh is on you.

    Here is something Cal Thomas wrote regarding the book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change,”

    Coleman then gets to the heart of the issue: “Their global warming scare is not driven by science; it is now being driven by politics. So today anybody who defies the prevailing ‘climate change’ scare puts his career and his reputation into extreme danger.

    “Among the facts revealed in Morano’s book are these: The world spends $1 billion a day to “prevent” global warming; A UN scientist says the “97 percent consensus” on global warming was “pulled from thin air,” presumably hot air from many politicians; scientific organizations claim climate change ‘consensus,’ but have not polled their members; climate policies are not helping, but “crushing the world’s poor. . . . Recent “hottest year” claims are based on statistically meaningless year-to-year differences; Antarctica is actually gaining, not losing ice; carbon dioxide levels today are 10 times lower than in some past Ice Ages.”

    “Real scientists who specialize in climate and related fields are quoted in the book. These are voices we rarely, if ever, see mentioned in the mainstream media because the media are part of the collusion. ”

    https://calthomas.com/columns/climate-change-hoax-exposed

    #160110

    Peter N
    Participant
    #160111

    Gumshoguy
    Moderator

    Global Warming Con. How to ‘steal’ American taxpayer money:

    As the Democrat Pelosi delegation will joins almost 25,000 people and 1,500 journalists flying to discuss Global Warming. Democrats led by Pelosi saw fit to pass bills allowing 0 (zero) dollars to protect the border.

    ————-

    @UNFCCC received $41.8Mill for 2018-19 budget to save the world. This is how @UN spent it:

    – $31.8M staff sal/trvl/ops
    – $4.1M in real climate prg

    Who audits where the money actually goes? Salary of a US Congressman/woman? Tired of the corruption yet?

    #160112

    Gumshoguy
    Moderator

    @Peter N – Very informative

    #160113

    Gumshoguy
    Moderator

    Like much of foreign aid, Global Warming works like this: Politicians steer millions to their pet projects and receivers in return “donate” huge amounts back to the politician in the form of “kickback” under the guise of campaign donations and gifts and the American taxpayers are their unwitting dupes who pay for this for it all irregardless if they support or want it. Its an old scheme that been around for a very long time.

    That is the big CON perpetrated on the American people all day every day and why these people hate this POTUS.

    #160117

    Amy H
    Participant

    Well said Knobby. Many points I wholeheartedly agree with. It’s more than agreement it’s information I’ve heard for the last 30 years living with my husband.

    Science, when done well, is truly a thing of beauty. Just like that cell you were viewing and the excitement you must have felt when discovering it doing something contrary to what you’d learned. That sense of discovery is intoxicating. Your professor doing as a proper scientist should, let the observations tell the story. Whatever preconceived notions one might have need to be ready for death. Of course, you may have observed it incorrectly but you did notice something different and that’s important. You saw something and it needed an explanation. Thus the journey begins. Why? What, how come?

    Imagine the excitement a scientist feels when they “discover” something. They want to share it. They want others to be excited. Sometimes excitement ruins the discovery. They miss things, their observations were wrong, their sample size not large enough, their study design flawed, they asked the wrong question. Sometimes the emotion is so strong it simply clouds their ability to see problems in their study. If they’re well education, then it’s even worse. There are not enough people capable of showing them how it is incorrect. They gleefully send it off for publication at Science or Nature and just get savaged. They get pissed. Start campaigns of support in an attempt to get a mass of other scientists to help. Thus a battle repeated for as long as science has been, starts.

    Science has always suffered a PR problem. The scientists themselves have incredible stories about life, medicine, and environment. It’s quite riveting, I think. It’s also dry and requires a lot of explanation and foundation. This is a problem. Not for science, but for the rest of us. Trying to read an article in the journal of immunology is virtually impossible. Trying to decipher the statistics from data requires at a minimum an undergraduate level comprehension of statical analysis.

    Now, add to the battle politicians. In this world, it is who you know. If you know the right people as a Scientist, you can take your battle to them. Or a “science” journalist. You can even publish your paper in one of the many publications that now exist and have it published (that’s another sad story about all the publications now available). It’s a spark. Will it catch? Who knows. As Knobby pointed out, this man-made climate change started with a poorly designed study that for some reason got legs. The damage began. Once the other legit scientists realized this crappy study had grown legs, it was too late, politicians grabbed it and used it to help fight their battles. Typically, studies of poor quality newer make it far. Remember the paper linking autism to immunizations? That paper was so poorly done it’s amazing it saw the light of day. Every once in a while those creep out and cause tremendous damage.

    Personal bias is everywhere. Scientist are no different except they are trained to work against it. The only way around this problem for common folks is to listen to the entire community of scientists. Then read for yourself. It is always best to be SKEPTICAL. Especially once a group has latched onto a piece of scientific work as is the case with Global warming/Climate change. The truth is out there. Who cares what Joe public thinks because most of the time those people just parrot what they’ve heard, certainly not what they read or researched. Its a choice we each make.

    People like Micheal, who seem genuine, are caught in a battle and on the wrong side. Much like the immunization and autism BS. To this day there are still people who think immmunizating your child is harmful. A lot of damage and life’s have been lost because of that Jack-ass paper (that has been debunked BTW). It’s shameful. The guy should be in jail.

    It is as those few paragraphs I quoted from the conservation book. Science must be careful because a lot of harm can be done. Policies are made. Life’s forever changed.

    #160125

    Wolf
    Participant

    “People like Micheal, who seem genuine, are caught in a battle and on the wrong side. Much like the immunization and autism BS. To this day there are still people who think immmunizating your child is harmful.”

    … like yourself obviously (on the vaccine issue).
    If it was NOT harmful please tell me why the government would pass a law PROTECTING Big Pharma from lawsuits resulting in vaccine damage?

    #160129

    Knobby
    Moderator

    Amy, so, you say its definitely not vaccines but they can’t pinpoint the reason for the uptick in autism. And don’t say its because of better diagnosis or autism now falling under a wider umbrella of conditions. What is causing the rise in autism?

    #160146

    Gumshoguy
    Moderator

    Amy and Knobby- Anyone take the flu vaccine this year? Anyone get the flu? What symptoms did you experience? I took the flu shot caught a nasty cough extreme incredible pain and associated muscle cramps to the point of visiting the hospital for some immediate relief. Never experienced anything like it ever, and I always have taken the shot.I have worked around public for for 25.6 years and came in contact with tons of sickly people and I always believed in preventative medicine and took safety precautions and still managed to get sick often on the job. That type of work is very very hazardous to one’s health in many ways.

    ——————————————————–

    #160147

    Amy H
    Participant

    Knobby, I shall point you to the journal of immunology. You can access thousands of titles and read their abstracts. The articles you find applicable I think you can pay a small fee for, but not always. Many are FOC. Talk with an immunologist. They are sort of a lonely group but very hard working and love to talk immunology.

    We’ve had this conversation before. We are not on the same side.

    I certainly don’t know what may be causing an uptick. I bet it’s many things, and sadly, changing terminology DOES often change diagnosis rates. Requesting me not speak the truth, so in other words I’m not allowed to give the answer is ludicrous. Would you rather I made something up? Don’t trust me, ask a researcher. Peruse journals. I hope you’re better at statical analysis then I. I have to ask a statistician and it’s still rough. But the info is there. You can find it.

    Chris might have an understanding since the DSM-5 updates diagnosis every few years. He might know the statistics readily regarding an uptick in rates for diagnosing mental illnesses and related diseases once the understandings of such improve. I imagine that’s a reasonable place to continue the journey.

    The probability of a reaction is not ZERO. It means some will have a reaction. Read medications labels and see what MIGHT happen. There’s not a single drug out there with ZERO side effects. You’re messing with homeostasis. Kids die at times from immunization. There is a risk. Old people, people with compromised immune systems die. So far, there is not remotely enough evidence saying immunizations cause autism. So much so that not a lot of research is being done, from what I’ve read, between the two. That should tell you something. It does for me.

    Herd immunity is no joke. Dying of a curable disease in this country is stupid. Spreading your child’s germs to those unable to be immunization or for those whom it did not work, is another stupid thing.

    Simply there isn’t any evidence strongly suggesting vaccines ARE unequivocally the cause. Diagnosis HAS gotten better. That’s how progress is made in science, incrementally more so then by large strides.

    I had a flu shot expecting a reaction because two of my friends did. Nope. Nothing. I have had reactions to immunizations before. I’ve talked plenty with my immunologist who is a funny and a Harvard educated German (I enjoy Germanic sensibilities, I find them humorous). The risks for things going wrong is always there. I won’t even grant you that the verdict is still out about correlation/causation.

    This is about climate change and I may have inadvertently high-jacked it. There wasn’t much more to say anyways. People will either choose to educate themselves on a certain topic or not. That’s okay. But if You don’t have a good grasp of an issue, don’t pretend to. I once believed, during the time AL Gore wrote his first climate book, that is was real and possibly man caused. Then I met my husband who kindly taught me how to evaluate science. Don’t trust what you read, sometimes see or hear. If you want the truth, start reading and observing and never stop. Be willing to change your mind in the face of contradictory evidence. Don’t follow the consensus, ever (that been a lesson I have to constantly re-learn because I too want acceptance and sadly at the price of ignorance). The lefty’s could care less, really about climate change. If they really cared, they’d know all the debates about it. Most all the science. They don’t. They have a bigger agenda; socialism. How they get there does not matter.

    #160149

    Amy H
    Participant

    Gum, my two friends, one 65 the other 28 got sick. The older one for about a week with dizziness, nausea and hot flashes. The younger felt like he got the flu for a day. The next morning after, he felt flu-like. The older guy has experienced issues upon occasion with immunization, pretty common that is… The younger one, never. It was his first bad experience. I totally expected to feel like crap. I thought, there’s no way I’m gonna get out of this problem. So, I had my shot on first of my two days off. Nothing. Boy those two were pissed! My hubby had the shot as well, nothing happened to him either.

    #160156

    Knobby
    Moderator

    Netflix has a new series called V Wars. Climate change/global warming caused Antarctic ice to melt releasing an ancient virus.

    I wonder how this rates with other climate change fiction.

    #160158

    Wolf
    Participant

    Can you answer my question?

    #160166

    Gumshoguy
    Moderator

    Thanks Amy.

    #160167

    Gumshoguy
    Moderator

    “Can you answer my question?”

    —————————————–

    Wolf address your question to somebody specific.I sent you some Bigfoot material specific to Australia a while back that I thought you might find helpful in your books that you did not acknowledge. The material I posted to you was from deep internet archive material that was of no intrinsic value to me. So there are times when items get by us without notice without formally calling out or addressing the individual separately.

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 237 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.