Banning the term climate change won’t stop the reality

[Rickster71]

Well, they're from the Government... and they're here to help.


Anyone remember the EPA forcing the use of MTBE and causing the largest case of pollution in history?
I'll bet most don't.
However, most will remember EXXON or BP spills... and that's how government propaganda works.

We couldn't trust the government then, why trust them or those paid with Govt Grant money now?

http://amlibpub.blogspot.com/2006/03/ethanol-and-mtbeshoud-epa-be-abolished.html
Internal documents available under the Freedom of Information Act show that EPA exaggerated claims and promulgated unwarranted policies.

EPA fraudulently manufactured fake “scientific” studies in order to support its views on sulfur dioxide.
EPA has funneled taxpayer money to lobby groups that support political action on policies—even unscientific ones—that EPA wants to promote (for example, a million dollars a year to the American Cancer Society).
EPA should be a scientific agency, not one that funds political activism. For all these reasons and many other examples of scientific malpractice, deception, and incompetence."

 

[Chu Gai]

Can you imagine the fine and weeks of outrage if BP and not the EPA were responsible for this?

 

[herbu]

Can you imagine the fine and weeks of outrage if BP and not the EPA were responsible for this?

It is but one example of how one party will ignore actions of someone in their own camp, yet vilify the same actions by someone in the other camp.

We both do it. Neither party has a monopoly. But one certainly has considerably more experience than the other.

 

[Rickster71]

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

But, but... politition Al Gore said in 2007, 2008 and 2009, that the North Pole would be “ice-free” by around 2013 because of alleged “man-made" global warming.

 

[Chu Gai]

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

But, but... politition Al Gore said in 2007, 2008 and 2009, that the North Pole would be “ice-free” by around 2013 because of alleged “man-made" global warming.

To be fair, there's still a net gain when it comes to oceans rising. Good idea rebuilding NOLA in the same location? Warming has also been observed on Mars and Pluto

 

[Chu Gai]

Noted wife beater and former boner of Charlize Theron, Sean Penn, who once called for the jailing of journalists critical of the deceased President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, says the upcoming climate talks in Paris is the last chance to prevent the world from overheating.

At the upcoming U.N. Climate summit in Paris, participating nations have prepared a little treaty that creates an “International Tribunal of Climate Justice”. This tribunal gives 3rd World countries the power to haul the U.S. into a global court with enforcement powers. Congress would be bypassed by this climate deal. Policies normally left to sovereign nations could be turned over to a U.N. body if the U.S. and its allies approve the proposed deal in Paris. The whole tribunal thing sounds like another deal doesn’t it.

The tribunal would take up issues such as “climate justice,” “climate finance,” “technology transfers,” and “climate debt.”
More than 130 developing nations led by South Africa, China and India are insisting they will not sign a climate deal in Paris unless it contains massive redistribution of wealth from developed to poor nations and they want the power to haul the U.S. and its allies before a U.N. Tribunal to enforce compliance.

 

[Chu Gai]

Here is the link to the English translation of the paper by the French mathematicians regarding their position on climate whatever. It's 195 pages long in a PDF format. I'm working my way through it but I rather doubt most in the sound bite media will.

 

[Hobbit]

Can you imagine the fine and weeks of outrage if BP and not the EPA were responsible for this?

I live here.... I totally disagree, people here are very outraged. People on both sides of the fence. In fact, being this is an area that relies heavy on gas production (not mining), the complete opposite is more the case. This is still in the news regularly. There's also no comparison between this disaster and the gulf disaster in magnitude. Even more so, back when they mined the area this happened but was caused by the minors.

Personally, I'm flabbergasted that any of these types of issues have anything to do with one party over another. No one should ever want to see anything like this happen. The impetus, whether it's the EPA or BP or FMI, or your one party or another, should be to resolve the problem to insure it doesn't happen again. Period.

 

[KEW]

So, Chu Gai, getting back to the OP and for the record, is your point in all of this that you believe the State of Florida was justified in banning the term "climate change" and you like the idea of the government putting language restrictions on agencies?

 

[herbu]

I live here.... This is still in the news regularly.

Too bad it's dropped off the national radar. Doubt we'll hear more than perhaps one 30 second bite about any resolution. Only locals will know.

 

[herbu]

So, Chu Gai, getting back to the OP and for the record, is your point in all of this that you believe the State of Florida was justified in banning the term "climate change" and you like the idea of the government putting language restrictions on agencies?

And how about the U of Wisc banning the term "political correctness"? It won't help because, "The school’s “Just Words” aims to “raise awareness of microaggressions and their impact” — a “microagression” being anything victim-class members might find offensive if they took 10 minutes to think."
http://nypost.com/2015/10/22/campus-speech-cops-ban-politically-correct/

I don't think we have to worry much about these "victim-class members" taking 10 minutes to think.
"Just kidding".

 

[Chu Gai]

So, Chu Gai, getting back to the OP and for the record, is your point in all of this that you believe the State of Florida was justified in banning the term "climate change" and you like the idea of the government putting language restrictions on agencies?

Well, I wouldn't say in all of this but terms are being changed for marketing purposes. And no, I don't like the gov't putting language restrictions. It creates a false sense that everyone is marching in lock step and to me anyways, it's like everyone reading from the same talking points memo. No different than Russians hiring bloggers to do propaganda.

 

[gene]

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

But, but... politition Al Gore said in 2007, 2008 and 2009, that the North Pole would be “ice-free” by around 2013 because of alleged “man-made" global warming.

Did you actually carefully read the study and the other papers on the NASA website? Did you notice what's happening in Greenland and the Arctic ice sheets as well as the sea level rise in coastal areas over the last 50-70 years?

excerpts for you to look at again:

We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”

But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”

Even if the data is correct, it shows a substantial reduction in the net increase in a short period of time. My guess is the next data collection will be much greater in net gain. 2008 is a long time ago in regards to climate change. Some areas may actually cool a bit (certain glaciers) while changes are associated with warming, altered precip patterns, fires, insects, floods, rising seas - this is much more than global warming limited terminology.

The study needs to compare to other glaciers to get a full picture of the reality of the situation. Which is why the reader should also check out the other articles on the NASA website about Greenland and the Arctic.

Meanwhile Australia has already taken measures to combat rising sea levels and NYC is preparing to adopt some of those measures too.

 

[Chu Gai]

From the French paper...

"Human beings are quite naturally interested in the sea level and for a long time have noted that it appears to be rising, but not everywhere and not uniformly. To be precise, the sea level, which rose 120m in 18,000 years (source: the French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea – IFREMER), or 6.6 mm per year, has risen by only 1.2 mm per year (French Naval Hydrographic and Oceanographic Service – SHOM) since 1800, and the rate has not speeded up recently; see [Christy and Spencer]."

 

[Chu Gai]

Research suggests climate change happened fast in the past.

 

[Chu Gai]

Scientific American takes a middle ground and briefly delves into the whole biofuel movement.

A German professor takes a look at data manipulation.

 

[gene]

Research suggests climate change happened fast in the past.

Just because something happened before for one reason, doesn’t mean that when it happens again it’s for the same reason.

You should spend some time reading this site. It could take decades or 100s or years to see the full effect of the acidification of the oceans due to increased CO2 absorption.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Earths-five-mass-extinction-events.html

If you look at the history of the past mass extinction events, they are almost always tied to a rise in global temperatures.

 

[gene]

Scientific American takes a middle ground and briefly delves into the whole biofuel movement.

A German professor takes a look at data manipulation.

Follow his background. He gets grant money to deny/debunk science:

http://www.desmogblog.com/friedrich-karl-ewert

http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute

The only people you will find denying anthropological climate change are either tied to big Oil or getting funded by a private entity to do so. The Koch Brothers spent $100's of millions to confuse the public on climate change.

 

[Chu Gai]

So, data manipulation is OK? That's not science.

 

[shadyJ]

So, data manipulation is OK? That's not science.

I am sure that one guy whose work is paid for by oil barons and whose papers appear in the prestigious scientific journal breitbart.com is totally objective and has definitively debunked the work of tens of thousands of serious scientists. Now who has peer reviewed his work again? I missed that part.