Discussion:
If you can't talk about your agw without talking politics...
Add Reply
JTEM is right
2018-10-29 04:20:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Look. Your "AGW" is politics. It's inseparable
from your feelings towards Trump, Fox news or
the oil industry. This is how you know it's
propaganda as that is the very purpose of
propaganda: Invent associations!

Propaganda invents associations. It controls
people by placing associations in their minds.
That way when they hear or see something the
masters don't want them to hear or see they
immediately associate it with something negative,
and then react towards it as if they would that
negative something.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/179540726468
Bret Cahill
2018-10-29 15:05:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- 'n nubbers skeer deniers.
Paul Aubrin
2018-10-30 06:37:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- 'n nubbers skeer deniers.
Here are a few numbers for you (from a peer reviewed publication):

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1758-5899.12295

Abstract

This article investigates the temperature reduction impact of major
climate policy proposals implemented by 2030, using the standard MAGICC
climate model. Even optimistically assuming that promised emission cuts
are maintained throughout the century, the impacts are generally small.
The impact of the US Clean Power Plan (USCPP) is a reduction in
temperature rise by 0.013°C by 2100. The full US promise for the COP21
climate conference in Paris, its so‐called Intended Nationally Determined
Contribution (INDC) will reduce temperature rise by 0.031°C. The EU 20‐20
policy has an impact of 0.026°C, the EU INDC 0.053°C, and China INDC
0.048°C. All climate policies by the US, China, the EU and the rest of
the world, implemented from the early 2000s to 2030 and sustained through
the century will likely reduce global temperature rise about 0.17°C in
2100. These impact estimates are robust to different calibrations of
climate sensitivity, carbon cycling and different climate scenarios.
Current climate policy promises will do little to stabilize the climate
and their impact will be undetectable for many decades.
Wally W.
2018-10-31 02:41:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- 'n nubbers skeer deniers.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1758-5899.12295
Abstract
This article investigates the temperature reduction impact of major
climate policy proposals implemented by 2030, using the standard MAGICC
climate model. Even optimistically assuming that promised emission cuts
are maintained throughout the century, the impacts are generally small.
The impact of the US Clean Power Plan (USCPP) is a reduction in
temperature rise by 0.013°C by 2100. The full US promise for the COP21
climate conference in Paris, its so?called Intended Nationally Determined
Contribution (INDC) will reduce temperature rise by 0.031°C. The EU 20?20
policy has an impact of 0.026°C, the EU INDC 0.053°C, and China INDC
0.048°C. All climate policies by the US, China, the EU and the rest of
the world, implemented from the early 2000s to 2030 and sustained through
the century will likely reduce global temperature rise about 0.17°C in
2100. These impact estimates are robust to different calibrations of
climate sensitivity, carbon cycling and different climate scenarios.
Current climate policy promises will do little to stabilize ***the*** climate
and their impact will be undetectable for many decades.
Even well reasoned articles can be tainted with greenie-speak.

There is no such thing as ***the*** climate, but greenies have gotten
away with this sloppy language for so long, few object to the
meaningless phrase.

Alarmist greenies may be much less afraid of numbers than facts. Their
models are all about spewing numbers, not so much facts.
Catoni
2018-10-31 03:07:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- 'n nubbers skeer deniers.
You mean like the nubbers your alarmist scientists put into their computers that created more than seventy warming results that dont match reality ? ?

Here... . your warming numbers prediction failures.... vs reality of real measurements using scientific instruments.

Loading Image...


Those nubbers ? ? LOL.... 5555555 :)
Bret Cahill
2018-10-29 15:06:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
R Kym Horsell
2018-10-29 15:59:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
Nubbrus is ebil!
Poliktiks is ebil!
Theffa nubbers is poliktiks!
--
You know you're a hillbilly if #3:
You reject everything known about sampling theory but regularly base your
claims on outliers and cherry picks.
Bret Cahill
2018-10-29 16:55:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
Nubbrus is ebil!
Poliktiks is ebil!
Theffa nubbers is poliktiks!
Yumans is ebil so it don matter how many die.
Post by R Kym Horsell
You reject everything known about sampling theory but regularly base your
claims on outliers and cherry picks.
Wally W.
2018-10-30 03:30:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
Nubbrus is ebil!
Poliktiks is ebil!
Theffa nubbers is poliktiks!
Yumans is ebil so it don matter how many die.
Post by R Kym Horsell
You reject everything known about sampling theory but regularly base your
claims on outliers and cherry picks.
Will they self-destruct when they reach complete unintelligibility?
Catoni
2018-10-31 03:08:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
Nubbrus is ebil!
Poliktiks is ebil!
Theffa nubbers is poliktiks!
Yumans is ebil so it don matter how many die.
Be so kind as to begin with yourself. Set the example for the rest of us.
George
2018-10-31 19:08:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 20:08:46 -0700 (PDT)
Post by Catoni
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
Nubbrus is ebil!
Poliktiks is ebil!
Theffa nubbers is poliktiks!
Yumans is ebil so it don matter how many die.
Be so kind as to begin with yourself. Set the example for the rest of us.
Preferably something long slow and drawn out with lots of pain..
Please


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Bret Cahill
2018-10-31 21:39:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by George
Post by Catoni
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
Nubbrus is ebil!
Poliktiks is ebil!
Theffa nubbers is poliktiks!
Yumans is ebil so it don matter how many die.
Be so kind as to begin with yourself. Set the example for the rest of us.
Preferably something long slow and drawn out with lots of pain..
Please
Affer tRUMP loses to dem ebil Dems nex week try not spree but if you must spree, spree local. Very local.

Just shoot up the confederate flag in the wibdow.
Catoni
2018-10-31 03:06:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics.
Climate science is nubbers -- n nubbers skeer deniers.
You mean like the nubbers your alarmist scientists put into their computers that created more than seventy warming results that dont match reality ? ?

Here... . your warming numbers prediction failures.... vs reality of real measurements using scientific instruments.


Those nubbers ? ? LOL.... 5555555 :)
JTEM is Remarkably Flexible
2019-04-15 17:26:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics. It's inseparable
from your feelings towards Trump, Fox news or
the oil industry. This is how you know it's
propaganda as that is the very purpose of
propaganda: Invent associations!
Propaganda invents associations. It controls
people by placing associations in their minds.
That way when they hear or see something the
masters don't want them to hear or see they
immediately associate it with something negative,
and then react towards it as if they would that
negative something.
"Global Warming" is propaganda. It's programing
people along the lines which the 1% have chosen.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/184136929743
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2019-04-15 17:47:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JTEM is Remarkably Flexible
Post by JTEM is right
Look. Your "AGW" is politics. It's inseparable
from your feelings towards Trump, Fox news or
the oil industry. This is how you know it's
propaganda as that is the very purpose of
propaganda: Invent associations!
Propaganda invents associations. It controls
people by placing associations in their minds.
That way when they hear or see something the
masters don't want them to hear or see they
immediately associate it with something negative,
and then react towards it as if they would that
negative something.
"Global Warming" is propaganda. It's programing
people along the lines which the 1% have chosen.
Words have meaning, anti-solar/wind nutters like you fear the change, and smear the need to make the change.
Loading...