What will happen to the AGW cultists under a LNP gov?

The truth that your RELIGION is failing....that doesnt offend me in the slightest.

 

Your ignorance of science offends me. If you don't understand it stop talking about it.

Why are the ignorant so certain that their lack of understanding is evidence that science is wrong?

 

YAWN....back to this again.....
The CHURCH of agw will fail.....In time once it all becomes clear it was nothing but a scam i bet you will tell your kids that you never believed in it...

 

Yeah, just after I tell them that I never believed in evolution after Intelligent Design is proven with 100% certainty.

 

With a little luck the religious AGW freaks will just do a Jim Jones and just remove themselves from the gene pool, they have shown that they are weak minded enough to fall for a scam.......

 

Given human activity emits 135 times more co2 than volcanoes, you would have to be suspicious of AGW. This clip plugs up a few holes in the denialist propaganda that Bolt was possibly unaware of. It is actually interesting viewing.
[video=youtube;H0jaQCSSCS4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0jaQCSSCS4[/video]

 

If this is coming from GW cultist then it is safe to assume its bull(*)(*)(*)(*)
---
List of the Global Warming Cult’s Lies

Finally, a list of the latest lies from the Global warming cult. The wheels continue to come off the “Climate Change” bus.

ClimateGate – This scandal began the latest round of revelations when thousands of leaked documents from Britain’s East Anglia Climate Research Unit showed systematic suppression and discrediting of climate skeptics’ views and discarding of temperature data, suggesting a bias for making the case for warming. Why do such a thing if, as global warming defenders contend, the “science is settled?”

FOIGate – The British government has since determined someone at East Anglia committed a crime by refusing to release global warming documents sought in 95 Freedom of Information Act requests. The CRU is one of three international agencies compiling global temperature data. If their stuff’s so solid, why the secrecy?

ChinaGate – An investigation by the U.K.’s left-leaning Guardian newspaper found evidence that Chinese weather station measurements not only were seriously flawed, but couldn’t be located. “Where exactly are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China?” the paper asked. The paper’s investigation also couldn’t find corroboration of what Chinese scientists turned over to American scientists, leaving unanswered, “how much of the warming seen in recent decades is due to the local effects of spreading cities, rather than global warming?” The Guardian contends that researchers covered up the missing data for years.

HimalayaGate – An Indian climate official admitted in January that, as lead author of the IPCC’s Asian report, he intentionally exaggerated when claiming Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 in order to prod governments into action. This fraudulent claim was not based on scientific research or peer-reviewed. Instead it was originally advanced by a researcher, since hired by a global warming research organization, who later admitted it was “speculation” lifted from a popular magazine. This political, not scientific, motivation at least got some researcher funded.

PachauriGate – Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman who accepted with Al Gore the Nobel Prize for scaring people witless, at first defended the Himalaya melting scenario. Critics, he said, practiced “voodoo science.” After the melting-scam perpetrator ‘fessed up, Pachauri admitted to making a mistake. But, he insisted, we still should trust him.

PachauriGate II – Pachauri also claimed he didn’t know before the 192-nation climate summit meeting in Copenhagen in December that the bogus Himalayan glacier claim was sheer speculation. But the London Times reported that a prominent science journalist said he had pointed out those errors in several e-mails and discussions to Pachauri, who “decided to overlook it.” Stonewalling? Cover up? Pachauri says he was “preoccupied.” Well, no sense spoiling the Copenhagen party, where countries like Pachauri’s India hoped to wrench billions from countries like the United States to combat global warming’s melting glaciers. Now there are calls for Pachauri’s resignation.

SternGate – One excuse for imposing worldwide climate crackdown has been the U.K.’s 2006 Stern Report, an economic doomsday prediction commissioned by the government. Now the U.K. Telegraph reports that quietly after publication “some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified.” Among original claims now deleted were that northwest Australia has had stronger typhoons in recent decades, and that southern Australia lost rainfall because of rising ocean temperatures. Exaggerated claims get headlines. Later, news reporters disclose the truth. Why is that?

SternGate II – A researcher now claims the Stern Report misquoted his work to suggest a firm link between global warming and more-frequent and severe floods and hurricanes. Robert Muir-Wood said his original research showed no such link. He accused Stern of “going far beyond what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence.” We’re shocked.

AmazonGate – The London Times exposed another shocker: the IPCC claim that global warming will wipe out rain forests was fraudulent, yet advanced as “peer-reveiwed” science. The Times said the assertion actually “was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise,” “authored by two green activists” and lifted from a report from the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group. The “research” was based on a popular science magazine report that didn’t bother to assess rainfall. Instead, it looked at the impact of logging and burning. The original report suggested “up to 40 percent” of Brazilian rain forest was extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall, but the IPCC expanded that to cover the entire Amazon, the Times reported.

PeerReviewGate – The U.K. Sunday Telegraph has documented at least 16 nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCC’s climate change bible, which calls for capping manmade greenhouse gases.

RussiaGate – Even when global warming alarmists base claims on scientific measurements, they’ve often had their finger on the scale. Russian think tank investigators evaluated thousands of documents and e-mails leaked from the East Anglia research center and concluded readings from the coldest regions of their nation had been omitted, driving average temperatures up about half a degree.

Russia-Gate II – Speaking of Russia, a presentation last October to the Geological Society of America showed how tree-ring data from Russia indicated cooling after 1961, but was deceptively truncated and only artfully discussed in IPCC publications. Well, at least the tree-ring data made it into the IPCC report, albeit disguised and misrepresented.

U.S.Gate – If Brits can’t be trusted, are Yanks more reliable? The U.S. National Climate Data Center has been manipulating weather data too, say computer expert E. Michael Smith and meteorologist Joesph D’Aleo. Forty years ago there were 6,000 surface-temperature measuring stations, but only 1,500 by 1990, which coincides with what global warming alarmists say was a record temperature increase. Most of the deleted stations were in colder regions, just as in the Russian case, resulting in misleading higher average temperatures.

IceGate – Hardly a continent has escaped global warming skewing. The IPCC based its findings of reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and in Africa on a feature story of climbers’ anecdotes in a popular mountaineering magazine, and a dissertation by a Switzerland university student, quoting mountain guides. Peer-reviewed? Hype? Worse?

ResearchGate – The global warming camp is reeling so much lately it must have seemed like a major victory when a Penn State University inquiry into climate scientist Michael Mann found no misconduct regarding three accusations of climate research impropriety. But the university did find “further investigation is warranted” to determine whether Mann engaged in actions that “seriously deviated from accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities.” Being investigated for only one fraud is a global warming victory these days.

ReefGate – Let’s not forget the alleged link between climate change and coral reef degradation. The IPCC cited not peer-reviewed literature, but advocacy articles by Greenpeace, the publicity-hungry advocacy group, as its sole source for this claim.

AfricaGate – The IPCC claim that rising temperatures could cut in half agricultural yields in African countries turns out to have come from a 2003 paper published by a Canadian environmental think tank – not a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

DutchGate – The IPCC also claimed rising sea levels endanger the 55 percent of the Netherlands it says is below sea level. The portion of the Netherlands below sea level actually is 20 percent. The Dutch environment minister said she will no longer tolerate climate researchers’ errors.

AlaskaGate – Geologists for Space Studies in Geophysics and Oceanography and their U.S. and Canadian colleagues say previous studies largely overestimated by 40 percent Alaskan glacier loss for 40 years. This flawed data are fed into those computers to predict future warming.

http://robertd.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/latest-list-of-the-global-warming-cults-lies/

 

Oh good, you started with the one that shows how stupid your side is.

What happened is that scientists used SCIENTIFIC TERMS and the idiots from your side decided that the terms meant something else.

They used the scientific term trick, to mean method, and your idiotic side decided that trick can only mean deception.

Thanks for giving us a list that we could discredit right off the bat.

 

Well so far you are doing a pretty lousy job of it...so continue...

but gotta luv this eh.....apparently if a GW cultist is caught out in only one fraud...that is a victory to them....you guys are a crack up!
_
ResearchGate – The global warming camp is reeling so much lately it must have seemed like a major victory when a Penn State University inquiry into climate scientist Michael Mann found no misconduct regarding three accusations of climate research impropriety. But the university did find “further investigation is warranted” to determine whether Mann engaged in actions that “seriously deviated from accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities.” Being investigated for only one fraud is a global warming victory these days.

 

After the libs win the election the cult of AGW in Australia will suffer yet another defeat. The religion will have to go underground....LOL

 

Devoted denialist seem to grasp anything to support their argument. It is quite clear that most on here simply do it to support their political persuasions. Needless to say anymore. I thought the gate hysteria cooled after it was all exposed for what it was. A bunch of amateurs analysing data well over their academic capacity.

What has happened to "climategate"?

What's happened is this.

First, the UK Parliament's Science and Technology Committee exonerated the scientist at the centre of the tempest, Professor Phil Jones, finding he has "no case to answer" and that his reputation "remains intact."

Then Lord Oxburgh (former chairman of Shell-UK) and his panel likewise exonerated the researchers, finding their "work has been carried out with integrity, and that allegations of deliberate misrepresentation" are "not valid."

Another enquiry, chaired by Sir Muir Russell, found the scientists' "rigour and honesty" to be beyond doubt.

Two enquiries by his university also cleared Professor Michael Mann – who presented the first of now innumerable "hockey stick" graphs – of all allegations.

Ultimately the (conservative) UK Government concluded "the information contained in the illegally-disclosed emails does not provide any evidence to discredit … anthropogenic climate change."

Not one, not two, but by now nine vindications.

This comes as no surprise to anyone with even a passing familiarity with the distinction between private chat and public actions.

And what has happened to the IPCC "Whatevergates"?

What's happened is this.

First, the Sunday Times apologised and retracted its "Amazongate" story. There is no "Amazongate"; there is only the Amazon rainforest threatened by climate change.

Then the Dutch government accepted responsibility for erroneously informing the IPCC that 55% of the Netherlands are below sea level. In fact only 26% are at risk of flooding because they are below sea level, whereas the other 29% are, err, at risk of flooding from rivers.

And about a year after "climategate" broke, the BBC finally apologised to the University of East Anglia for its misleading coverage of the "climategate" pseudo-scandal.

All that's left of the "Whatevergates", therefore, is red-faced apologies and one indubitable IPCC error: the incorrect projection of the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers to 2035, as opposed to the more likely 2350. This error was drawn to the public's attention by, wait for it, an IPCC author.

Can we now forget about "gate" in connection with "climate"?
No.

Because there are too many real climategates that must not escape attention. Read on if you so choose:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/nov/23/attacks-climate-scientists-real-climategate

 

And yet none of that will matter once the libs take power and remove AGW RELIGIOUS freaks from goverment jobs.

 

What an intelligent and unbiased response.....

 

When compared to YOUR posts yes it is..
And it shows something else that your posts lack.....THE TRUTH.

 

Which ones in particular?

 

I see the cultists are now trying to stop any dams from being built.

 

You do realise that the LNP are "AGW Cultists" and their policy of "direct action" to address climate change involves spending $1 billion a year on reducing GHG emissions?

 

You do realize why that policy came about dont you...* rolls eyes at the stupidity *

 

Oh yes? Do tell. This should be good.

 

ziggy, do i REALLY have to take you to school AGAIN?

 

efjay, I can say for certain, that I have never learnt a single thing from you.

But please, do explain why a party promising to make the same 2020 cuts to ghg emissions as the ALP and who promise to spend at least $1 billion a year to achieve this, are not "AGW Cultists"?

What exactly is your definition of an "AGW Cultist"?

 

I see that eloquence runs in your family.

Either the Coalition is lying, and they have no intention of following through on their "direct action" plan. Or they're "AGW cultists" just like the ALP.

So which is it?

 

Please show me where the LNP has signed up to the un funding cult?

 

Please show me where the LNP has stated that they will never contribute any money to any UN climate change initiatives?

- - - Updated - - -

So your definition of "cult" is any government that has contributed to a UN climate change fund...?

Are you sure you have the definition of "cult" right efjay?

 

still waiting
oh thats right there is NO $$$$ for pope gore under the libs direct action plan