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

Ziggy Stardust · Feb 15, 2013

They're still going to be giving money to the UN from the aid budget.

So... let's see if I've got this right. It doesn't matter that they're spending billions of dollars reducing GHG emissions in "direct action" against Climate Change, they're not "AGW Cultists", because they're not implementing a permit based carbon pricing scheme (which was their policy for several years)?

efjay · Feb 15, 2013

Ziggy Stardust said: ↑

They're still going to be giving money to the UN from the aid budget.

So... let's see if I've got this right. It doesn't matter that they're spending billions of dollars reducing GHG emissions in "direct action" against Climate Change, they're not "AGW Cultists", because they're not implementing a permit based carbon pricing scheme (which was their policy for several years)?
Click to expand...

so you are going to tell me what I think now?

Ziggy Stardust · Feb 15, 2013

It wasn't a rhetorical question efjay.

dumbanddumber · Feb 15, 2013

Panzerkampfwagen said: ↑

Science doesn't offer proof. GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD.

No proof in science. NONE.

So stop asking for something that CAN'T exist and then acting smug and thinking you won.
Click to expand...

and a consensus does, does it????

3. That Scientific Global Warming ConsensusNot! Forbes
By Larry Bell

So where did that famous consensus claim that 98% of all scientists believe in global warming come from? It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered yes to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with.

Then of those, only a small subset, just 77 who had been successful in getting more than half of their papers recently accepted by peer-reviewed climate science journals, were considered in their survey statistic. That 98% all scientists referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered yes.

That anything-but-scientific survey asked two questions. The first: When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant? Few would be expected to dispute thisthe planet began thawing out of the Little Ice Age in the middle 19th century, predating the Industrial Revolution. (That was the coldest period since the last real Ice Age ended roughly 10,000 years ago.)

The second question asked: Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures? So what constitutes significant? Does changing include both cooling and warming and for both better and worse? And which contributionsdoes this include land use changes, such as agriculture and deforestation?

the rest here
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...consensus-not/
Click to expand...

efjay · Feb 16, 2013

Under the Lib goverment the AGW cultists sucking public funds will be cut off. Failures like flim flam will have to suck it up and realize that their religion just isnt going to get the funding they want

Ziggy Stardust · Feb 16, 2013

Well no efjay, they will just be paying other "AGW cultists".

Log in or Sign up

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

Ziggy Stardust Well-Known Member

efjay Well-Known Member

Ziggy Stardust Well-Known Member

dumbanddumber New Member

efjay Well-Known Member

Ziggy Stardust Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

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

Ziggy Stardust Well-Known Member

efjay Well-Known Member

Ziggy Stardust Well-Known Member

dumbanddumber New Member

efjay Well-Known Member

Ziggy Stardust Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches