Read here how the idiotic (man-caused) global warming believers attack us with their abundant lies and distortions:

Fools on parade

It is true fracking will not impact global warming.  But this is because (man caused) global warming does not even exist.  It is instead a figment of evil liberals' vivid imaginations, a means to their hoped-for political ends.

Views: 1741

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

RE: "It is true fracking will not impact global warming."

I have a small disagreement with that statement.

If man made global warming exists (not that I believe that it does) ..... fracing would impact global warming.

Natural gas (released through fracing) displaces more potentially polluting sources of energy .... such as coal, solar panels and wind turbines.

Clean, green natural gas .... burn it and you get H20 (which we need to live) and CO2 (plant food).

Plants turn CO2 into complex carbohydrates; some of which is people food, some of which is animal food, some of which is lumber and some of which is termite food (you can't win everything). 

We breathe in oxygen, and exhale CO2 .... plants breathe in CO2 and exhale oxygen .... if CO2 is good for plants, it is good for us ... plants and people, we need each other .... and we both need CO2.

All IMHO,

                   JS

Here is question for all those people that beleave in global warming! What caused all the ice that was here in penn. Roughly 500 -600 thousand yrs ago to resead north? Human kind and the industrial revelution wasn't around ? What made all that glacier ice move north? I need a good reason for that if they can give proof! Thanks for your response Rich
I want to say that I am a for drilling and fracking and believe that all the crap they say about it is false. With that said

The world has gone thru many cycles before man and will do so without man. But there does appear to be a correlation between man's appearance, specifically the industrial revolution, and the rapid changes in our environment.

The world has a way of safely storing carbon under the ground and deep in our oceans. I think it would be difficult to argue that releasing all that carbon (coal, oil, etc.....) at such a fast pace will have some type of impact on the world.

I don't believe all the crap the tree huggers spew but if we are having a detrimental effect on this world we are borrowing from our children then we have a responsibility to preserve and protect.

Just my opinion.
This "Jackass Science" is in fact believed by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists, and most of the world.

Does that make it fact? No.

But it is unwise to be dismissive of rather compelling, although incomplete, evidence in support of climate change induced by human activity.


Reminds me a bit of the decades of denial of the link between cigarettes and cancer.

I do not believe that an overwhelming number of climate scientists truly agree with man made global warming.  I do believe that an overwhelming number of climate scientists live in fear of losing the lucrative grants FOR studying global warming.                              Unlike many I do remember the '70's and the majority of scientists that were warning that fossil fuels were causing the current GLOBAL COOLING and who were foretelling of the coming ice age.   The difference between then and now is that some have determined that the current prediction could be made profitable.

We can probably agree that it is pointless to discuss in this forum whether climate chAnge is real, or whether human activity has a measurable influence. Count me out of this discussion.

But a separate, and more easily resolved issue is the status of the opinions of scientists on the issue. We will both agree that scientific opinion is not necessarily equivalent to fact. And that scientific consensus in no way results acceptance in every human mind. The concept of evolution comes to mind.a scientific "fact", but denied by many.

Rather than accepting my statement that the large majority of scientists believe in climate change, I suggest you refer to the website climate.NASA.gov.
This source states that 97% of scientists in the field accept the concept of climate change produced by human activity.

Supporting organizations include the American Association for the Advancement of Sciience, American Chemical Society, American Meteorological Society, National Academy of Science, and others.

Do these endorsements make it true.
No.
And it certainly is not unanimous. (But what is?)

Perhaps this just demonstrates the gross stupidity or dishonesty of our scientific community!
What are you trying to say in this post? Nobody is trying to tax, levy fines, or cause "electricity prices to necessarily skyrocket" based on evolution or creationism. However the climate change lobby and our dear leader are.

RE: “This "Jackass Science" is in fact believed by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists, and most of the world.”

False statement; this is discredited propaganda.

This statement has been falsely made; (man-caused) global warming has been declared to be ‘Settled Science”, in an attempt to stifle legitimate debate. In true science, very little is ever considered “settled’.

The fact is there is NO overwhelming majority scientists who believe in (man-caused) global warming.

 

 RE: “But it is unwise to be dismissive of rather compelling, although incomplete, evidence in support of climate change induced by human activity.”

Unfortunately there is NO compelling evidence in support of climate change induced by human activity.  

Climate on Earth has been changing for almost 5 Billion years; and will doubtless continue to change (whether we continue to be on the channel, or not).

First they called it “Global Warming”; the problem is, the warming ceased 15/16 years ago.

So, they next started referring to “Climate Change”; but there is really no evidence that climate was changing in any consistent manner.

So, now they want to refer to it as “Climate Disruption” …. With that vague terminology a warm Summer can be attributed to the nebulous term (“Climate Disruption”).

With that vague terminology a Cold Winter can be attributed to the nebulous term (“Climate Disruption”).

With that vague terminology a cyclical drought in California can be attributed to the nebulous term (“Climate Disruption”).

With that vague terminology a cyclical wet Monsoon in Arizona and New Mexico can be attributed to the nebulous term (“Climate Disruption”).

There are cycles that have been identified …. The 30+/- year cycles are potentially associated with periodic cycles in the output of energy from the Sun.

Reminds me a bit of the decade (1980’s) when the overwhelming majority scientists believed that we were going into a new ice age (we were in a cycle of cooling).

Follow the money; the disciples of (man-caused) Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption are often those that are soliciting or benefitting from Government Research Grants.

Other disciples of (man-caused) Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption are often Politicians using alarmism for nefarious purposes.

Other supposed disciples of (man-caused) Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption are in it for the money (Al Gore, Goldman Sacks); getting rich (and richer) on a ‘con’.

Other supposed disciples of (man-caused) Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption are Russian and Middle Eastern oil producers; who wish to stifle North American competition.

Other disciples of (man-caused) Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption are the gullible; those prone to believe in a need for self-flagellation as contrition for all of mankind’s sundry failings.

Other supposed disciples of (man-caused) Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption are those seeing such constructs as ‘carbon credits’.

By and large, the Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption Alarmists appear to be a bunch of ‘sick puppies’.

 

All IMHO,

                       JS

Thank you Jack-well put.  As you said "follow the money".

Lynn
Your concise, logical and thoughtful comment is appreciated.
Now I understand the issues.
Clearly, the petroleum, coal and railroad industries have no financial incentive to challenge those thousands of loonie scientists who are pushing this crazy notion that man might be capable of damaging the environment!

RE: "thousands of loonie scientists who are pushing this crazy notion that man might be capable of damaging the environment!"

Now, you "have hit the nail on the head".

Happy to see that you now recognize that it is just a minority of 'loonie' alarmists (assisted by con artists) behind the false religion of 'Climate Disruption'. They are not truly scientists; they are simply acolytes of a new cult/religion.

OBTW, the railroad industry (exemplified by Barak Hussein Obama'sr BFF, Warren Buffet) is pushing against the clean green Keystone XL pipeline, so that they can ship oil by dirty dangerous rail. Follow the money, it leads back to Obama, Buffet, Al Gore and their Wall Street friends and supporters.

The left have been conned .... I believe that the phrase they use to describe their supporters in private is 'useful idiots'.

Stephen, happy to see that you have been educated and now see the light and now support clean green natural gas ... fracing for America's future; a future that will support the middle class.

JS

 

Jack Straw,   Nice write !    Thank you....

RSS

© 2022   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service