Crackdown ordered on climate-change sceptics

[ELVIS]

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00560/cbcd4356-b9e7-11e3-_560412c.jpg

Ministers (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/article4051905.ece) who question the majority view among scientists about climate change should “shut up” and instead repeat the Government line on the issue, according to MPs.

The BBC should also give less airtime to climate sceptics and its editors should seek special clearance to interview them, according to the Commons Science and Technology Committee. Andrew Miller, the committee’s Labour chairman, said that appearances on radio and television by climate sceptics such as Lord Lawson of Blaby, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, should be accompanied by “health warnings”.


:elvis:

[Seshmeister]

Yup.

Facts v. Politicians working for big oil facts win.

http://www.campaigncc.org/climate_change/sceptics/hall_of_shame#lawson

[ODShowtime]

We can't say for sure that all climate change skeptics are bought and paid for by the energy lobby. But we can all agree that the incentive is there for many industries to turn a blind eye to the raping and pillaging that is so profitable to them and their shareholders.

[Seshmeister]

Big oil and coal lobbyists have done an amazing job in the US, less well elsewhere.

[ODShowtime]

That's because the US is full of ignorance and greed.

[Angel]

Big oil and coal lobbyists have done an amazing job in the US, less well elsewhere.

Big oil rules Canada...

[ELVIS]

I laugh at how you freaks buy into all the oil is evil and global warming propaganda...

[FORD]

I laugh at how you freaks buy into all the oil is good and KKKoch funded global warming denial propaganda...

Fixed that for ya.....

[ELVIS]

What a dumbass...

[FORD]

That's what I said when I saw that video of your Senator, Diaper Head calling the Stalin Funded Randtards "patriotic americans" and your fellow Lousyana residents applauding his sheer dumbassery.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7mStFMk6og

[ELVIS]

Please don't try to propagandize me with your leftist bullshit...

[FORD]

How is it "leftist bullshit" to show Diaper Head sucking Koch in his own words?

[ELVIS]

I dunno dude...

It's just because you can't seem to stop playing the left / right game...

It doesn't matter what any of these clowns are saying, people who are awake are not listening...

At all...

[FORD]

If you can live through Hurricane Katrina and the BP destruction of the Gulf, and STILL deny man made Global Climate Change, it's fairly fucking obvious who is neither awake, nor listening :(

And that's no "left/right game". It's fucking obvious reality that even a blind man could see.

[ELVIS]

Shaddup...:rolleyes:

[ELVIS]

:elvis:

[FORD]

If Alex Jones is denying climate change, then maybe he really IS on the KKKoch payroll. Because there is no sane person who could deny what is fucking obvious to anybody with a functional set of eyeballs.

Even those who are PAID to say otherwise actually know better. They just won't be caught saying so in front of a live camera or microphone.

[Kristy]

Big oil and coal lobbyists have done an amazing job in the US, less well elsewhere.

You should know by now this is just Smellvis parroting Alex Jone$ and his factless, distorted paranoid shit.

[Kristy]

If Alex Jones is denying climate change, then maybe he really IS on the KKKoch payroll.

However much of a fucking asshole Jone$ may be he wasn't always on their payroll. I'm guessing in the past three to four years he's been bought off - but that F A T fuck definitely works for them now.

[Seshmeister]

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140331-ipcc-report-global-warming-climate-change-science/

Brian Clark Howard
National Geographic
PUBLISHED MARCH 31, 2014

The world is not ready for the impacts of climate change, including more extreme weather and the likelihood that populated parts of the planet could be rendered uninhabitable, says the planet's leading body of climate scientists in a major new UN report.

The 772 scientists who wrote and edited the report argue that world leaders have only a few years left to reduce carbon emissions enough to avoid catastrophic warming, which would produce significant sea level rise and large-scale shifts in temperatures that would dramatically disrupt human life and natural ecosystems.

"Observed impacts of climate change are widespread and consequential," according to the report, which is from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and was released Monday morning in Yokohama, Japan.

The report uses stronger language around current impacts of climate change than past IPCC releases.

It warns that the impacts from changing climate are already happening, calling out "high risk levels" for spread of disease in Africa; property loss and mortality due to wildfires in North America; and decreased food production and food quality in South America. (See video: "Global Warming 101.")

The report also warns of more dire consequences to come and says governments are ill-prepared for the effects.

It shows that "today's choices are going to significantly affect the risk that climate change will pose for the rest of the century," says Kelly Levin, a scientist who studies climate change impacts at the World Resources Institute in Washington, D.C.

Frances Beinecke, the president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, called the report an "S.O.S. to the world."

"Crossing a Threshold"

The new report, from a body known as the UN panel's Working Group II, warns that the world is close to missing a chance to limit the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution.

World leaders had previously agreed on a target of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

Beyond that point, "impacts will begin to be unacceptably severe," the authors wrote. (Quiz: What You Don't Know About Climate Science.)

"There is potential for crossing a threshold that leads to large system changes, and that's a very unknown world that has severe consequences," Levin says.

If the warming were to go beyond 6-to-7 degrees Fahrenheit (about four degrees Celsius), she says, as predicted by some climate models, "we would see extensive changes in agriculture."

Even at the lower end of predictions, the report warns: "Climate change will lead to increased frequency, intensity and/or duration of extreme weather events such as heavy rainfall, warm spells and heat events, drought, intense storm surges and associated sea-level rise."

Levin hopes the report will spur international leaders to negotiate more aggressive attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. (How does the greenhouse effect work?)

People Get Ready

Levin says the IPCC report's bottom line is that governments need to invest more in planning for the impacts of climate change. Communities that are already marginalized, she says, including the urban poor, are most at risk.

Some communities should be moved to less risky areas, and support services need to be bolstered, she says: "We need more fast-acting institutions and early-warning systems. We are already committed to significant warming, so adaptation is a great necessity."

Energy companies and governments are actively planning and building the infrastructure that will be in service for decades, she notes. As climate change continues, power plants will need to have enough water for cooling their systems in places that are likely to get hotter and drier.

"Whether we pick a low-emission or high-emission pathway, we may not see changes immediately," Levin says. "But in terms of a century it is a drastically different world."

The new report specifically calls out risks to agriculture.

"In the U.S. we have seen acute effects of severe heat on corn, cotton, and soy yields," says Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate scientist at Stanford University and one of the lead authors of the North American section of the document.

"That kind of severe heat is likely to increase in response to continued global warming," he says.

Understanding the IPCC

The IPCC was founded in 1988 and has released a report on the current state of scientific knowledge about climate change roughly every five years.

The new Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) updates the science since the last report was issued in 2007.

The massive report, running hundreds of pages, is being released in three sections, each prepared by a different working group.

Working Group I focused on the physical science behind climate change; its report was published last September (see the report's five key takeaways).

In April, Working Group III will address how governments can work to mitigate climate change.

[Seshmeister]

772 scientists - this conspiracy runs very deep doesn't it?

And why is it that it's always the scientists that get to write the reports?

Why don't they let people that don't know a fucking thing about the subject write the reports? Also why waste our tax payers money on all this when the oil companies would happily fund a report?

[Angel]

I laugh at how you freaks buy into all the oil is evil and global warming propaganda...

My grandfather was an Alberta oil pioneer. I know just how evil that industry is...

And what I see with my own eyes when it comes to climate has nothing to do with propaganda.

[Seshmeister]

It's funny that the people who live in the hilly cold places are trying to persuade the guy in the hot swamp basin that we should all be doing something to stop the sea rising too much...

[Nickdfresh]

Please don't try to propagandize me with your leftist bullshit...

Oh look, the closet, Bush-loving Republican dipshit just fell out of Elvis' mouth...

[Nitro Express]

Big oil rules Canada...

Big oil rules the world. Oil companies are multinational. They just so happened to make the US Dollar the world's reserve currency and by making a deal with Opec to sell oil in US dollars, the rest of the world had to buy their oil in US Dollars. Anyone who didn't play ball got either thrown out of power by CIA or invaded by US or forces. The thing is the US Dollar really isn't US at all. It's not issued by the US government. It's issued by a private bank. The oil companies are privately owned as well with stock holders from all over the world. What's US is the soldiers who die in military operations guarding private interests. They have done a good job of selling protecting private assets as "spreading democracy" or going after terrorists.

At the end of the day it's just guarding oligarch's loot. Canada is a favorite place for white collar crime. It has some of the weakest government regulations on corporations in the world. Oddly enough a lot of corporate shenanigans seems to lead to Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa and then over to London (ground central for financial corruption).

Also where the greatest corporate corruption lies is in countries where most their manufacturing and industry has been outsourced. They still have decent universities but the domestic technical jobs seem to be with the government (especially the military). Like I said, the oligarchs can make bigger easier money just gaming the markets and they can make more by using whatever slave labor piss hole is available. They have an interest in the military because at the end of the day, you have to have a big stick to stay in power. It all makes sense. The west has degraded into a den of oligarchs who only care about military assets and enough slaves to provide what they want. The rest are useless eaters.

The global warming, carbon credit agenda seems to be propagated by the same people who outsource to places like China. They don't care about pollution as long as it's not in their backyard. It also seems to be promoted out of the UK where you have large interests in the uranium mining industry. Then you have GE and Obama wanting to build more and more nuclear power plants. What's more dangerous? A modern state of the art clean coal plant or another Fukushima?

Is the climate changing? Yup. It has always changed. Nothing new.

[Nitro Express]

In the 70's they said we were going into global cooling. It never happened. Then the global warming thing started in the 1990's with Al Gore selling it and then you had David de Rothschild going around and selling it before the Copenhagen summit. It's all about having a global energy tax. Now certain scientists are saying we are going into a global cooling phase again.

Sure. The UN is all about global taxes and treaties so they of course are going to be pushing the global warming alarmism. Someone somewhere is always preaching alarmism. Remember when they said AIDS would wipe out the insurance industry and break whole nations in the early 90's? It never happened. I would say in the industrialized nations are biggest problem is the banks completely taking over our governments. State enforced monopolies are our biggest problem. Not another the world is ending story.

You probably have a higher chance of being killed by collapse of the currency system or a rogue government than you do of so called global warming.

[vandeleur]

You probably have a higher chance of being killed by collapse of the currency system or a rogue government than you do of so called global warming.

Sure if your dicking about on the roth army with our nice tech .....
Maybe not so if your border line starving and all the crops fail .....

We have crunch zones in our economies , climate change hits there hardest .

[vandeleur]

Someone somewhere is always preaching alarmism. Remember when they said AIDS would wipe out the insurance industry and break whole nations in the early 90's? It never happened.

Nitro this is such a weird post .

An estimated 40 million people have died of aids world wide with a possible 75 million still with the infection .
If something doesnt happen in your country does it not happen ?

[Nitro Express]

A lot of people have died but it didn't destroy economies and nations like the hype in the early 1990's said would happen. They were preaching a world destroying plague. Nobody in the industrialized world talks about AIDS anymore. I never hear about it anymore. Gay marriage and global warming are the new trends. Heck the religious right were hoping AIDS would wipe out the gay populations. If AIDS was as bad as they were saying it was going to be we wouldn't be having the gay marriage debate now.

AIDS seems to be on the decline.

[Nitro Express]

This geologist must not be on the Rothschild payroll.

[Nitro Express]

Nitro this is such a weird post .

An estimated 40 million people have died of aids world wide with a possible 75 million still with the infection .
If something doesnt happen in your country does it not happen ?

Compared to a world population of 7 billion it's a drop in the ocean. People (in the west at least) seem to be more concerned with over population. What's weird is people don't celebrate death because they constantly go on about how overpopulation is a big problem.

[Nitro Express]

Sure if your dicking about on the roth army with our nice tech .....
Maybe not so if your border line starving and all the crops fail .....

We have crunch zones in our economies , climate change hits there hardest .

You have a higher chance of dying in an auto accident. If you are scared about starving I suggest you store up a years worth of rice and beans.

[vandeleur]

I wasn't suggesting I was worried about starving ,I was suggesting those already struggling will feel the impact of climate change most .

But if your struggling in a 3world country saving a years worth of food is probably the answer :)

[Nickdfresh]

A lot of people have died but it didn't destroy economies and nations like the hype in the early 1990's said would happen. They were preaching a world destroying plague. Nobody in the industrialized world talks about AIDS anymore. I never hear about it anymore. Gay marriage and global warming are the new trends. Heck the religious right were hoping AIDS would wipe out the gay populations. If AIDS was as bad as they were saying it was going to be we wouldn't be having the gay marriage debate now.

AIDS seems to be on the decline.

Because they have drugs to deal with it and African countries have finally gotten over denial and begun to deal with the problem. But AIDS has had a huge, negative impact on Africa, no question...

[Seshmeister]

This geologist must not be on the Rothschild payroll.

I watched the first 6 seconds and then the guy says he is a geologist.

If I want to know about geology I'll listen to him. If my car breaks down I take it to a mechanic.

These fuckwit denialists are never climatologists.

[Seshmeister]

In the 70's they said we were going into global cooling. It never happened. Then the global warming thing started in the 1990's with Al Gore selling it and then you had David de Rothschild going around and selling it before the Copenhagen summit. It's all about having a global energy tax. Now certain scientists are saying we are going into a global cooling phase again.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2014/03/Screen-Shot-2014-03-24-at-7-30-57-PM.png

[Angel]

In the 70's they said we were going into global cooling. It never happened.

It was mainstream media that said cooling. Peer reviewed scientific articles said otherwise.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm

"Peer-Reviewed Literature

However, these are media articles, not scientific studies. A survey of peer reviewed scientific papers from 1965 to 1979 show that few papers predicted global cooling (7 in total). Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming (Peterson 2008).

The large majority of climate research in the 1970s predicted the Earth would warm as a consequence of CO2. Rather than 1970s scientists predicting cooling, the opposite is the case."

[FORD]

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i191/hissyspit/hissyspitiphone/9285D59B-2CEE-4345-999E-ADB3A6B43B38_zps50v4c1vy.png

[Seshmeister]

It was mainstream media that said cooling. Peer reviewed scientific articles said otherwise.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm

"Peer-Reviewed Literature

However, these are media articles, not scientific studies. A survey of peer reviewed scientific papers from 1965 to 1979 show that few papers predicted global cooling (7 in total). Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming (Peterson 2008).

The large majority of climate research in the 1970s predicted the Earth would warm as a consequence of CO2. Rather than 1970s scientists predicting cooling, the opposite is the case."

You get these non facts that just go around and around forever.

Within the next few months ELVIS or Nitro will post again that all the scientists 40 years ago said the world was cooling so it can't be heating up now.

[ELVIS]

Whether it's heating up or not, the so called "climate change" is not due to the current CO2 concentration...

[FORD]

Whether it's heating up or not, the so called "climate change" is not due to the current CO2 concentration...

And where does CO2 concentration come from?

More carbon in the atmosphere - from man made sources. Combined with less plant life, especially old growth forests which would have "eaten" that CO2 and produced oxygen.

Those trees also do a good job of soaking up water in the soil. Something that helps if you live in a flood area. Or even worse, just below a recently clearcut hillside. Just ask the folks up in Oso about that :(

[Nickdfresh]

Whether it's heating up or not, the so called "climate change" is not due to the current CO2 concentration...

"Climate Change" is da' hootin' hollerin talk of da' devil!11680

[Nitro Express]

Plant more trees. They convert CO2 to oxygen.

[Nitro Express]

I watched the first 6 seconds and then the guy says he is a geologist.

If I want to know about geology I'll listen to him. If my car breaks down I take it to a mechanic.

These fuckwit denialists are never climatologists.

Geologists know the history of the earth and what the climate changes were over long periods of time. It puts things in perspective instead of the alarmist the world is going to end unless we have a global carbon tax and GE builds more nuclear power plants. Climate change existed way before the industrial revolution.

[Angel]

Better listen to him Sesh...he's all-knowing don't you know?

My grandfather was a geologist. I'm sure the only thing he could tell you about climate was how it impacted his ability to get oil out of the ground. ;)

[jacksmar]

“Earth Day” 1970 Kenneth Watt, ecologist: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

[Nickdfresh]

Geologists know the history of the earth and what the climate changes were over long periods of time. It puts things in perspective instead of the alarmist the world is going to end unless we have a global carbon tax and GE builds more nuclear power plants. Climate change existed way before the industrial revolution.

Bullshit. I worked with geologists that couldn't find the composition of their asshole..

[Nickdfresh]

“Earth Day” 1970 Kenneth Watt, ecologist: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

Well there's all the proof we need! Thanks, cumsmear! See, 97% of climate scientists are wrong because cumsmear pulled a quote of some idiot "ecologist" from when he was a teenager...

[WACF]

Geologists know the history of the earth and what the climate changes were over long periods of time. It puts things in perspective instead of the alarmist the world is going to end unless we have a global carbon tax and GE builds more nuclear power plants. Climate change existed way before the industrial revolution.

That is exactly right.

Climate change is real...it has been for over a billion years.

The fear mongering going on is all about more taxes and selling books.

The focus should be on pollution...and the damage being done to the planet.

That is the concern...and should stay the concern...pollution is impossible to deny.

[Kristy]

Bullshit. I worked with geologists that couldn't find the composition of their asshole..

You can Wiki working with people now? We live in strange times.

[FORD]

That is exactly right.

Climate change is real...it has been for over a billion years.

The fear mongering going on is all about more taxes and selling books.

The focus should be on pollution...and the damage being done to the planet.

That is the concern...and should stay the concern...pollution is impossible to deny.

Naturally occurring climate change happens for the same basic reason man made climate change does. Carbon based pollution entering the atmosphere. Whether it's a volcanic eruption, or a huge wildfire, or the occasional meteor hitting the earth - which reportedly is what took the dinosaurs out.

There's little we can do to prevent the volcanic eruptions. We can follow Smokey The Bear's advice and do a lot to prevent forest fires (though not eliminate them completely, and ironically, climate change itself makes more of them happen every year) and only in recent decades have we had the capability to blast the shit out of an asteroid if it looks like it's heading for Earth.

But these things are rare occurrences. The man made pollution is not, and it's far easier to control. It's just a matter of the will to do it drowning out the propaganda from those who are making too much money poisoning the planet.

[Nickdfresh]

You can Wiki working with people now? We live in strange times.

Yeah, try Googling "working with internet bullshitter potheads who beat a dead horse and believe the same MH370 conspiracy bullshit they make fun of Elvis for". You'll go right to the Wiki page on Mini-mouse on Acid. It's awesome...

[Nickdfresh]

That is exactly right.

Climate change is real...it has been for over a billion years.

The fear mongering going on is all about more taxes and selling books.

The focus should be on pollution...and the damage being done to the planet.

That is the concern...and should stay the concern...pollution is impossible to deny.

That's just the last ditch argument of climate change denial that ignores that the climate's radical changes have coincided with relatively recent human activities of the past 10,000 years. namely, agriculture to the industrial revolution...

[Seshmeister]

That is exactly right.

Climate change is real...it has been for over a billion years.


No it's been real for the whole history of the planet - the difference is now it's happening over decades instead of tens of thousands of years.

The planet will be fine, it's the talking monkeys clinging onto it that are in trouble...

[ELVIS]

What's happening over decades ??

[vandeleur]

Please don't take this the wrong way ..., regardless of global warming , global cooling . Global flatness , global newness 6000 years old etc .
Does it matter it's only poor people this will effect .

Whatever climate change ..... Effects it isn't real people .

It's mostly someone else .

[Kristy]

Yeah, try Googling "working with internet bullshitter potheads who beat a dead horse and believe the same MH370 conspiracy bullshit they make fun of Elvis for". You'll go right to the Wiki page on Mini-mouse on Acid. It's awesome...

Wrong, as usual, Nick.

I'll let you play with your imaginary "friends."

[ELVIS]

That's just the last ditch argument of climate change denial that ignores that the climate's radical changes have coincided with relatively recent human activities of the past 10,000 years. namely, agriculture to the industrial revolution...

Hahahaha...

What a dork...

[Va Beach VH Fan]

So when your entire living area is underwater in, say, 50 years, what's that gonna be, an Act of God?

[Nickdfresh]

Wrong, as usual, Nick.

I'll let you play with your imaginary "friends."

Okay. I'm going to play with our friend Elvis, now. :)

[Nickdfresh]

So when your entire living area is underwater in, say, 50 years, what's that gonna be, an Act of God?

He's got it all planned out! Jesus will save him like he saves all flood victims. ;)

http://rlv.zcache.com/jesus_is_my_life_saver_tee_shirts-r81635d66b33747979f7749c90dd0365d_804gs_512.jpg

[jacksmar]

http://didiswall.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pix-times.jpg

[jacksmar]

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/images/Newsweek.jpg

[Nickdfresh]

http://didiswall.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pix-times.jpg

You see, cumstain, this is why you're such a puerile, mindless bag of skin. You just lap up whatever right wing bullshit blog you finally figured out how to cut and spam from. But my silly friend, the problem is that your "Oh, in 1977 they said it was an ice age and now it's global warming!!!!!" fuckbaggery is that's it's based on a completely false hoax of a photoshopped Time Magazine cover.

Here's the real one:
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/files/2013/06/Time_Covoer_April_9_2007_1101070409_400.jpg

This is why I detest people like you who have to base all their arguments on lies funded by special interest groups like the oil and gas industry. But the truth is that you are not even smart enough to be a liar, because you're just a dumb fucking brainless parrot chirping others' lies because you are incapable of actually thinking for yourself or watching or reading what you do not want to hear.

[jacksmar]

http://www.forrestmims.org/images/346_TOPS_Cover.jpg

[Nickdfresh]

BTW, they are "sceptics'" alright ;) As in tanks... :D

Here's some context from the above photo:



The 1970s Ice Age Myth and Time Magazine Covers – by David Kirtley
Posted by Greg Laden on June 4, 2013

This is a guest post by David Kirtley. David originally posted this as a Google Doc, and I’m reproducing his work here with his permission. Just the other day I was speaking to a climate change skeptic who made mention of an old Time or Newsweek (he was not sure) article that talked about fears of a coming ice age. There were in fact a number of articles back in the 1970s that discussed the whole Ice Age problem, and I’m not sure what my friend was referring to. But here, David Kirtley places a recent meme that seems to be an attempt to diffuse concern about global warming because we used to be worried about global cooling. The meme, however, is not what it seems to be. And, David places the argument that Ice Age Fears were important and somehow obviate the science in context.
The 1970s Ice Age Myth and Time Magazine Covers

- by David Kirtley

A few days ago a facebook friend of mine posted the following image:
Facebook_meme_Global_Cooling_11

From the 1977 cover we can see that apparently a new ice age was supposed to arrive. Only 30 years later, according to the 2006 cover, global warming is supposed to be the problem. But the cover on the left isn’t from 1977. It actually is this Time cover from April 9, 2007:

Time_Covoer_April_9_2007_1101070409_400

As you can see, the cover title has nothing to do with an imminent ice age, it’s about global warming, as we might expect from a 2007 Time magazine.

The faked image illustrates one of the fake-skeptics’ favorite myths: The 1970s Ice Age Scare. It goes something like this:

In the 1970s the scientists were all predicting global cooling and a future ice age.
The media served as the scientists’ lapdog parroting the alarming news.
The ice age never came—the scientists were dead wrong.
Now those same scientists are predicting global warming (or is it “climate change” now?)

The entire purpose of this myth is to suggest that scientists can’t be trusted, that they will say/claim/predict whatever to get their names in the newspapers, and that the media falls for it all the time. They were wrong about ice ages in the 1970s, they are wrong now about global warming.

But why fake the 1977 cover? Since, according to the fake-skeptics, there was so much news coverage of the imminent ice age why not just use a real 1970s cover?

I searched around on Time’s website and looked through all of the covers from the 1970s. I was shocked (shocked!) to find not a single cover with the promise of an in-depth, special report on the Coming Ice Age. What about this cover from December 1973 with Archie Bunker shivering in his chair entitled “The Big Freeze”? Nope, that’s about the Energy Crisis. Maybe this cover from January 1977, again entitled “The Big Freeze”? Nope, that’s about the weather. How about this one from December 1979, “The Cooling of America”? Again with the Energy Crisis.

Now, there really were news articles in the 1970s about scientists predicting a coming ice age. Time had a piece called “Another Ice Age?” in 1974. Time’s competition, Newsweek, joined in with “The Cooling World” in 1975. People have collected lists and lists of “Coming Ice Age” stories from newspapers, magazines, books, tv shows, etc. throughout the 1970s.

But if it was such a big news story why did it never make the cover of America’s flagship news magazine like the faked image implies? Perhaps there is more to the story.

In the 1970s there were a few developments in climate science:

Scientists were finding answers to the puzzle of what caused ice ages in the past: variations in earth’s orbit.
Scientists were gathering data from around the world to come up with global average temperatures, and they found that temperatures had been cooling since about the 1940s.
Scientists were realizing that some of this cooling was due to increasing air pollution (soot and aerosols, tiny particles suspended in the air) which was decreasing the amount of solar energy entering the atmosphere.
Scientists were also quantifying the “greenhouse effect” of another part of our increasing pollution: carbon dioxide (CO2), which should cause the climate to warm.

The realization that very long cycles in earth’s orbit could cause the waxing and waning of ice ages, coupled with the fact that our soot and aerosols were already causing cooling, led some scientists to conclude that we may be headed for another ice age. Exactly when was still a little unclear. However, the warming effects of CO2 had been known for over a century, and new research in the 1970s was showing that CO2 warming would more than compensate for the cooling caused by aerosols, resulting in net warming.

This, in a very brief nutshell, was the state of climate science in the 1970s. And so the media of the time published many stories about a coming ice age, which made for timely reading during some very cold winters. But many news stories also mentioned that other important detail about CO2: that our climate might soon change due to global warming. In 1976 Time published “The World’s Climate: Unpredictable” which is a very good summary of the then current scientific thinking: some scientists emphasized aerosols and cooling, some scientists emphasized CO2 and warming. There was no consensus either way. Many other 1970s articles which mention a Coming Ice Age also mention the possibility of increased warming due to CO2. For instance, here, here and here.

Fake-skeptics read these stories and only focus on the Coming Ice Age angle, and they enlarge the importance of those scientists who focused on that angle. They totally ignore the rest of the picture of 1970s climate science: that increasing CO2 would cause global warming.

The purpose of the image of the two Time magazine covers, and of the Coming Ice Age Myth, is not to show the real history of climate science, but to obscure that history and to cause confusion. It seems to be working. Because today, when there really is a consensus about climate science and 97% of climatologists agree that adding CO2 to the atmosphere is leading to climate change, only 45% of the public know about that consensus. The other 55% must think we’re still in the 1970s when scientists were still debating the issue. Seems newsworthy to me, maybe Time will run another cover story on it.


http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/06/04/the-1970s-ice-age-myth-and-time-magazine-covers-by-david-kirtley/

[Jesus Christ]

He's got it all planned out! Jesus will save him like he saves all flood victims. ;)

http://rlv.zcache.com/jesus_is_my_life_saver_tee_shirts-r81635d66b33747979f7749c90dd0365d_804gs_512.jpg

Not a good strategy, Nicodemus......

While I obviously would not want to discourage anybody's faith in Me, there's also the part where ye have to use the common sense My Dad gave you. Perhaps the most appropriate prayer in this case would be "The Serenity Prayer".

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

Referring to FORD's previous post, the volcanic eruptions, meteors, and forest fires would be the things ye cannot change. The man made pollution would be the things ye can.

And a good step towards the wisdom to know the difference would be to not accept the lies from the Sons of Koch. :jesuslol:

[ELVIS]

I think we all know faux jesus is FORD, except FORD...

[ELVIS]

So when your entire living area is underwater in, say, 50 years, what's that gonna be, an Act of God?

That's an ignorant post if I ever saw one...

[FORD]

I think we all know faux jesus is FORD, except FORD...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRZ1ePEmhsk

[Kristy]

That's an ignorant post if I ever saw one...

As opposed to worship of a certain F A T community college dropout endless parroting post - such as yours.
http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/050ae845943a.jpg

[Va Beach VH Fan]

That's an ignorant post if I ever saw one...

Ignorant, as in "lacking knowledge or awareness in general" ??

You may not agree with it, but ignorant it is not.....

[vandeleur]

Tenuous link to weather but it made me laugh

Screening of Noah cancelled due to flooding :)

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/noah-screening-cancelled-due-to-flooding-9246550.html

[FORD]

Tenuous link to weather but it made me laugh

Screening of Noah cancelled due to flooding :)

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/noah-screening-cancelled-due-to-flooding-9246550.html

Gotta laugh at the irony. How long before Pat Robertson claims it was a "message from God"?

[jacksmar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrTi_J7Dfc8

[ELVIS]

Ignorant, as in "lacking knowledge or awareness in general" ??

You may not agree with it, but ignorant it is not.....

Ok, so where's this water going to come from ??

[ELVIS]

How long before Pat Robertson claims it was a "message from God"?

How long before you realize nobody cares what Robertson says ??

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Ok, so where's this water going to come from ??

Take a few minutes and watch....

[ELVIS]

HBO ??

No thanks...

[FORD]

Vice is a decent news show. It's probably closer to actual journalism than anything else on corporate media these days. And they are on HBO now, but they have been around long before their TV show. I don't even have cable TV (let alone HBO), but I manage to find it when I want to.

[ELVIS]

Well, I guess I'll watch it to be fair...

[ODShowtime]

The problem here isn't that the super funny conservatives in this thread are making so many hilarious jokes about the topic. The problem is that the polluting industries have done a spectacular job making people believe that global warming is a political issue and a right vs. left issue.

Here we see how effective the brainwashing can be. I believe that both of the comedians in this thread live very close to sea level. If we beat back the bullshit far enough both will claim that they'll be dead before anyone suffers from this. We'll see.

[Nitro Express]

Oh well. I just read where Queen Elizebeth II is going to let Haliburton frack the UK. She apparently waived the trespass laws and since she owns the mineral rights, Haliburton can pull up to your farm and start fracking. Oddly enough they say it costs more to frack than what the gas can be sold for but hey if you can stick the taxpayer with the loses you make money.

http://rt.com/shows/keiser-report/episode-585-max-keiser-777/

[Nitro Express]

One thing is certain, however. We are never going to accept the enormous changes to our lifestyles most environmentalists want. We are not going to reverse the industrial revolution and renewable energy sources like wind farms simply aren't going to cut it.

Lovelock suggests two things that would help; nuclear power and fracking. Fracking is a new way of looking for natural gas that involves sinking wells deep below the surface of the Earth. It is hugely reducing American coal and oil dependency.

Lovelock says: "The (British) government is too frightened to use nuclear, renewables won't work – because we don't have enough sun – and we can't go on burning coal because it produces so much CO2, so that leaves fracking. It produces only a fraction of the amount of CO2 that coal does, and will make Britain secure in energy for quite a few years. We don't have much choice."

All I can say is enjoy the greater environmental damage fracking will cause. Global warming is going to be a boom for Haliburton and General Electric. Even if they can burn low sulfur coal clean by using new technology the gas and nuclear industries don't like that. Maybe we live in an age where cheap clean power is technically possible but the energy barons don't want cheap energy. They want it scarce and expensive. One solution is to sell fear, buy politicians, and force the public to do what they want.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/david-quinn/global-warming-leaves-us-a-stark-choice-fracking-or-nuclear-power-30154376.html

[ELVIS]

Like buy into global warming with zero evidence ??

[Angel]

Like buy into global warming with zero evidence ??

Open your fucking eyes and get out into the real world. The evidence is overwhelmingly there...

[FORD]

Open your fucking eyes and get out into the real world. The evidence is overwhelmingly there...

He's literally seen the evidence in his own swampy back yard. He just denies it because Alex Jones told him it was all a plot from the Kenyan Socialist to put him in a FEMA death camp.

[jacksmar]

awww.........

another reality hijacked thread.................

[jacksmar]

He's literally seen the evidence in his own swampy back yard. He just denies it because Alex Jones told him it was all a plot from the Kenyan Socialist to put him in a FEMA death camp.

What was the carbon footprint burned up to when we wasted everyone's lives proving Gore didn't get elected????

[FORD]

What was the carbon footprint burned up to when we wasted everyone's lives proving Gore didn't get elected????

Well, you should have told Jeb & Cruella not to steal the election then.

[jacksmar]

Well, you should have told Jeb & Cruella not to steal the election then.

TURD, the question is: What was the carbon footprint burned up to when we wasted everyone's lives proving Gore didn't get elected? It certainly added to global warming.

[FORD]

Gore actually DID get elected. Despite all the votes stolen before, during, and after the election by Jeb, Cruella, and the BCE theft team, in the final count, Gore had the most votes.

Unfortunately, these final totals were not published until the third week of September 2001, and due to other BCE caused/enabled events of that time did not get the news coverage they deserved.

Counting every fucking vote is not a waste. Though flying James Baker in on a private plane to coordinate the theft certainly was.

Now stop trying to hijack the fucking thread with this bullshit.

[jacksmar]

Gore actually DID get elected. Despite all the votes stolen before, during, and after the election by Jeb, Cruella, and the BCE theft team, in the final count, Gore had the most votes.

Unfortunately, these final totals were not published until the third week of September 2001, and due to other BCE caused/enabled events of that time did not get the news coverage they deserved.

Counting every fucking vote is not a waste. Though flying James Baker in on a private plane to coordinate the theft certainly was.

Now stop trying to hijack the fucking thread with this bullshit.

TURD, I checked tiki and the goggle and the bureau of records (which has an 8 x 10 of a nude Penelope Pitstop on top of the bureau) and there was no record of Gore as US prez.

If you don't know the answer to: What was the carbon footprint burned up to when we wasted everyone's lives proving Gore didn't get elected?.....
just say so.

So why was a carbon footprint not important in 2000?

Are all carbon footprints created equally? Are carbon footprints racist?

Are CO2 emissions higher in the summer or just during sex?

Does anyone use a carbon footprint - proof latex condom during sex? Where does a consensus of global warming scientists place a used latex condom as to not fuck mother nature?

Can an African Swallow carry a used latex condom deposited by a consensus of global warming scientists from the dump to the Arctic Circle and if not is it a simple question of weight distributions or distance?

Do African Swallows create a global warming carbon foot print after long night of mulberries and night crawlers?

Can a consensus of global warming scientists consent willingly to group sex where parka clad Pygmies are the highlight of the evening wearing carbon footprint - proof latex condoms and plastic Yahtzee dice earrings and can they drive for Denny's later for Moons Over My Hammy if they drive a Toyota Vagina? Or is late night cooking past the carbon footprint curfew?

just asking........

[FORD]

You know what created a really big carbon footprint?

9/11/01

The illegal invasion and occupation of Afghanistan

The illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq

None of which would have happened without Chimpy stealing the election.

Fucking dumb son of a bitch even stole his "paintings"......

http://animalnewyork.com/2014/george-w-bush-took-paintings-google-images/

But enough of this bullshit. Back on topic.........

Starting Sunday April 13, at 10pm EDT Showtime will air the first of an eight part series on Climate Change Years of Living Dangerously.

This groundbreaking documentary event series explores the human impact of climate change. From the damage wrought by Hurricane Sandy to the upheaval caused by drought in the Middle East, YEARS OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY combines the blockbuster storytelling styles of top Hollywood movie makers with the reporting expertise of Hollywood’s brightest stars and today’s most respected journalists.

http://www.sho.com/sho/years-of-living-dangerously/home


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O2kkpFfwfU

[jacksmar]

There's nothing ground breaking about Gaia worshipers.

BTW, a consensus of global warming scientists have determined ground rules for ground use.

1. No ground breaking.
2. No sacred ground.
3. No ground ers.
4. No ground lings
5. No coffee ground s
6. No play grounds or non play grounds


If these rules are followed a consensus of global warming scientists have determined we will be 11 degrees colder by 2000. (Thanks Kenneth Watt)


And don't forget: a consensus of global warming scientists have determined that by 1995, 75 to 85 percent of all species would be extinct (Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson)

carbon footprint - proof latex condoms......priceless

[ELVIS]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O2kkpFfwfU

What a bunch of hogwash...

[Kristy]

HBO ??

No thanks...


HBO is no PimpoWhores disinformation propaganda.

Please get cancer from fluoride and die a slow, painful death.

[ELVIS]

I don't drink fluoride...

[Kristy]

Whatever, redneck
http://idiotpantsparty.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/white-trash1.jpg

[Kristy]

This groundbreaking documentary event series explores the human impact of climate change. From the damage wrought by Hurricane Sandy to the upheaval caused by drought in the Middle East, YEARS OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY combines the blockbuster storytelling styles of top Hollywood movie makers with the reporting expertise of Hollywood’s brightest stars and today’s most respected journalists.

I must say I am surprised that you of all people would buy into Hollywood propaganda. I'd say this is some suspicious funding for this somewhere.

[FORD]

All those Hollywood producers have million dollar beach houses in Malibu. They know they will be as fucked as the rest of us when the sea levels rise. It could be completely in their own self interest to push this agenda. If it gets through the KKKoch propaganda that's brainwashing ELVIS and Jerksmear and those like them, I'm OK with that. Not that either of them will probably be convinced, but others might be.

I don't subscribe to Showtime, so I have no interest in promoting it myself. Will I watch it? Maybe... if I can find it in the same places I found Dexter or House of Lies.

[ELVIS]

So, you're promoting some bullshit you may not even watch ??

[ELVIS]

"When the sea levels rise...":rolleyes:

[Kristy]

You give them way too much credit. Neither Smellvis or Asscracksmar are nowhere near intelligent enough to recognize Koch-funded horseshit. They're talking point parrots who steal their disinformation from lame Libertardian sites who purport junk science.

[FORD]

So, you're promoting some bullshit you may not even watch ??

Well, OK.... if you insist that I watch it, why don't you watch it too?

In fact, I'll make it easy for you..... since Showtime was kind enough to put the first episode online already.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brvhCnYvxQQ

Dunno if they plan on putting the entire series on YouTube or not, but it would certainly be my recommendation, as limiting this message to only Showtime subscribers really isn't a wise move as far as getting a message out.

[FORD]

"When the sea levels rise...":rolleyes:

Says the swamp dweller in a hurricane zone. :rolleyes:

[ELVIS]

How is the sea level going to rise if the polar ice caps are growing ??

[ELVIS]

They're talking point parrots who steal their disinformation from lame Libertardian sites who purport junk science.

And you steal and regurgitate the same mainstream bullshit over and over...

[Nickdfresh]

How is the sea level going to rise if the polar ice caps are growing ??

They're not growing, retard. You're like some fucking stupid child that keeps asking, "how the earth could be round when everything is so flat?" when it's been explained to you several times now. You can easily Google it, like I've done several times before...

[Nickdfresh]

And you steal and regurgitate the same mainstream bullshit over and over...

And you keep regurgitating the same conspiracy shit pulled out of Alexis' asshole, over and over...

[Kristy]

And you steal and regurgitate the same mainstream bullshit over and over...

"Regurgitate" - more Jone$ vernacular, I assume.

[jacksmar]

You give them way too much credit. Neither Smellvis or Asscracksmar are nowhere near intelligent enough to recognize Koch-funded horseshit. They're talking point parrots who steal their disinformation from lame Libertardian sites who purport junk science.

Kristy, why are you here? How many climate warming refugees were there supposed to be in 2013 according to the U.N.?

Q How do you know when a woman is about to say something smart?
A When she starts her sentence with, “A man once told me…”

[FORD]

Even WALMART is starting to worry about Global Climate Change. And you don't get more right wing and greedy than those assholes.

Check out their new turbine driven hybrid 18 wheeler, which looks like something that should be on the Death Star....



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NER9X4_gtYk

Granted, WalMart is responsible for much of this environmental damage themselves, especially with the "let's have all our cheap shit made in China" business practices, but when they start taking green technology seriously - even if it's out of their own self interest - then maybe it's time the idiots who shop at WalMart wake the fuck up.

[Kristy]

Kristy, why are you here? How many climate warming refugees were there supposed to be in 2013 according to the U.N.?

No idea. I'm sure your Libertardian site will tell me.

Golly!

[PETE'S BROTHER]

How is the sea level going to rise if the polar ice caps are growing ??

vertically

[Nickdfresh]

Kristy, why are you here? How many climate warming refugees were there supposed to be in 2013 according to the U.N.?
...”

Some fake number you'll pull our of Elvis' asshole? Much like your bullshit Time magazine cover, dummy?

[jacksmar]

Some fake number you'll pull our of Elvis' asshole? Much like your bullshit Time magazine cover, dummy?

........and nick denial chimes in....... good thing we haven't seen a fake anything from your good good friend turd.......

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303532704579477222157281450?commen tid=7190480


nick, do you need me to read this to you too?

[ELVIS]

vertically

Wrong...

it's a lie...

[Nickdfresh]

........and nick denial chimes in....... good thing we haven't seen a fake anything from your good good friend turd.......

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303532704579477222157281450?commen tid=7190480


nick, do you need me to read this to you too?

Maybe you and Elvis should get a room and globally warm each others cocks?

[ELVIS]

What was that bullshit we were told around 1999 or so ??

"The arctic will be ice-free by 2013."

Yeah right...

The truth is that the Arctic ice cap grew by nearly a million square miles from 2012-2013, an increase of 60% year over year...

So, it seems to me that the doom-and-gloom, climate change-induced apocalypse isn't happening...

At all...


:elvis:

[jacksmar]

Even WALMART is starting to worry about Global Climate Change. And you don't get more right wing and greedy than those assholes.

Check out their new turbine driven hybrid 18 wheeler, which looks like something that should be on the Death Star....



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NER9X4_gtYk

Granted, WalMart is responsible for much of this environmental damage themselves, especially with the "let's have all our cheap shit made in China" business practices, but when they start taking green technology seriously - even if it's out of their own self interest - then maybe it's time the idiots who shop at WalMart wake the fuck up.

Turd says Walmart evil.

Did you want to discuss the rig or your socialism turd?

Currently..

This rig has one major issue and that's the trying to offset a 200% increase in price over a standard big rig.

Volvo had a hybrid in 2002 that had 56 batteries so I am amazed that Capstone's 30 kilowatt microturbine is able to create enough energy to charge the battery and move the rig.

BTW, turbine engines are insanely efficient compared to a piston driven engine internal combustion engine.

Maybe if you climate warning idiots stepped over to an Indycar garage you might learn something more than you think you know.

Stock tip:

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/04/07/who-says-capstone-turbine-corporations-products-ha.aspx

[ELVIS]

Nah, they all buy into the garbage that says the combustion engine is inefficient and obsolete...

[Seshmeister]

I don't drink fluoride...

Yes you do.

You've drank fluoride every single day you've been alive you silly person...

[FORD]

........and nick denial chimes in....... good thing we haven't seen a fake anything from your good good friend turd.......

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303532704579477222157281450?commen tid=7190480

The WSJ hasn't been a reliable source since Murdoch took it over. Which is sad, because they used to have reasonable journalists there. The editorial page always lived up to the name "Wall Street", of course, but the articles were reliable enough.

Now it's just FAUX Noize and the FishWrapper Post under a different logo.

[jacksmar]

Maybe you and Elvis should get a room and globally warm each others cocks?

nick, e doesn't need me for anything.

now you and turd can't seem to separate. you guys really are the same spirit. soul mates. life partners.

And knowing that when the earth melts or freezes that you and turd will be left to procreate helps everyone on the DLR Army board sleep less contentiously.

[jacksmar]

The WSJ hasn't been a reliable source since Murdoch took it over. Which is sad, because they used to have reasonable journalists there. The editorial page always lived up to the name "Wall Street", of course, but the articles were reliable enough.

Now it's just FAUX Noize and the FishWrapper Post under a different logo.

TURD says WSJ evil.

[Seshmeister]

Nah, they all buy into the garbage that says the combustion engine is inefficient and obsolete...

Oh yeah it's just fucking perfect.

You get dead plants and animals and then wait for them get buried a few miles underground, then simply wait for a few hundred thousand years under that heat and pressure and hooray it's ready. Now all you need to do is transport it to where it's needed without it leaking out and killing all your seafood and ruining the environment so you can set it on fire fucking up the atmosphere.

[jacksmar]

Yes you do.

You've drank fluoride every single day you've been alive you silly person...

Sesh, is that bad?

[FORD]

Nah, they all buy into the garbage that says the combustion engine is inefficient and obsolete...

Let's put it this way.... if you applied the same love of 19th century technology to everything else that you do to the internal combustion engine, you would be reading this post as morse code on a telegraph wire right now, and it would probably take you a Hell of a lot longer to respond to it.

Of course you could always reply in a letter and send it via Pony Express......

[Seshmeister]

Sesh, is that bad?

Fluoride is like everything else, there is a healthy level and a harmful one.

All water has fluoride in it just at different levels. There are places where water has naturally higher levels than any place where fluoride is added to the water supply because it's low.

Fluoride in your water is just about the last thing you should be worrying about as a middle aged man in America, it's like thinking being eaten by a dragon is more of a risk than heart disease.

[ELVIS]

Hahahahahahahaha...:biggrin:

Tell us another one !!

[ELVIS]

Let's put it this way.... if you applied the same love of 19th century technology to everything else that you do to the internal combustion engine, you would be reading this post as morse code on a telegraph wire right now, and it would probably take you a Hell of a lot longer to respond to it.

Of course you could always reply in a letter and send it via Pony Express......

That just shows you know nothing about an internal combustion engine...

[FORD]

That just shows you know nothing about an internal combustion engine...

Have there been minor changes and improvements over the years? Of course.....

But in the end, it's still something that burns a non-renewable fuel source with a rapidly disappearing supply, and the toxic byproducts of burning the fuel - and also the toxic byproducts of harvesting the fuel (including wars) are NOT FUCKING WORTH IT when the technology is present to replace it with something much better.

[ELVIS]

What technology is that ??

[FORD]

Well, did you see that big 18 wheel monstrosity a few posts up?

Just one example.....

[SunisinuS]

It is true that the ICE even as piston based has advanced (Mazda abandoned rotary engines because of that fact, even after 5th graders myself built that clear plastic kit) it still has as it's source crap from Dinos. I prefer physic potential. I never understand why politics from the right does not understand even what Hitler did....get the fuck away from petroleum based machines...they limit your potential. Read Polesti and the search for non-petroleum based anything crap.

All more efficient than chemical/petroleum based technology:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/tech/innovation/navy-new-technology/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

Imagine ships that fire missiles at seven times the speed of sound without using explosives, or that use lasers to destroy threats at the cost of about a dollar a shot, and vessels making fuel from the very seawater in which they're floating.

That's the glimpse of the high-tech future the U.S. Navy gave this week. And these aren't just ideas. They've all been shown to work to some degree.

Saturday, the Navy will christen its most advanced warship ever, the destroyer USS Zumwalt, which may one day be using these new technologies.

The Zumwalt, which was launched last year and is to be christened at Bath Iron Works in Maine, is the Navy's first stealth destroyer. At 610 feet long and 80 feet wide, it's about 100 feet longer and 20 feet wider than ships in the Navy's current fleet of Arleigh Burke class destroyers, but the canopy and the rest of the Zumwalt is built on angles that help make it 50 times harder to spot on radar than an ordinary destroyer.
"It has the radar cross-section of a fishing boat," Chris Johnson, a spokesman for Naval Sea Systems Command, told CNN when the ship was launched last year.

In its current configuration, the Zumwalt will carry a considerable arsenal of weapons, including two Advanced Gun Systems (AGS), which can fire rocket-powered, computer-guided shells that can destroy targets 63 miles away. That's three times farther than ordinary destroyer guns can fire.

But in the future, it could be fitted with the even more advanced systems the Navy talked about this week.

The Laser Weapon System (LaWS) will be tested at sea this summer.
One, a laser weapon prototype, will be tested aboard the amphibious transport dock USS Ponce in the Persian Gulf this summer, the Navy said.

"This is a revolutionary capability," Rear Adm. Matthew Klunder, chief of Naval Research, said in a statement. "This very affordable technology is going to change the way we fight and save lives."
The laser weapon is design to take on aircraft or small surface vessels that may pose threats to Navy ships. Tests in 2011 and 2012 showed it can accomplish that mission.

The laser can be fired by one sailor using a video game-like console and do it at little cost, the Navy said.
"Spending about $1 per shot of a directed-energy source that never runs out gives us an alternative to firing costly munitions at inexpensive threats," Klunder said.

The Navy thinks the other weapon prototype it discussed this week, the electromagnetic railgun, will save money while providing a more potent force.

The EM Railgun launches projectiles using electricity instead of chemical propellants.

The gun uses electromagnetic force to send a missile to a range of 125 miles at 7.5 times the speed of sound, according to the Navy. When it hits its target, the projectile does its damage with sheer speed. It does not have an explosive warhead.

"The electromagnetic railgun represents an incredible new offensive capability for the U.S. Navy," Rear Adm. Bryant Fuller, the Navy's chief engineer, said in a statement. "This capability will allow us to effectively counter a wide range of threats at a relatively low cost, while keeping our ships and sailors safer by removing the need to carry as many high-explosive weapons."


The railgun projectiles could cost about 1/100th the price of current missiles, according to Klunder.

The Navy said the railgun will be tested at sea aboard the USS Millinocket, a non-combat ship known as a joint high-speed vessel, in 2016. No decision has been made on which combat ships might eventually be deployed with a railgun.
No matter what ships are chosen, other Navy scientists said this week those vessels may someday draw their fuel from the oceans they're crossing.

Researchers at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, Materials Science and Technology Division, said this week they have demonstrated proof-of-concept on the ability to draw carbon dioxide and hydrogen from seawater and turn it into forms of gasoline.
Heather Willauer, a Naval Research Laboratory chemist, called the technology "game changing."

"This is the first time technology of this nature has been demonstrated with the potential for transition, from the laboratory, to full-scale commercial implementation," she said in a statement.
The lab's researchers used "an innovative and proprietary NRL electrolytic cation exchange module" to remove the carbon dioxide from the water and produce hydrogen gas in the process.
"The gases are then converted to liquid hydrocarbons by a metal catalyst in a reactor system," the research lab's statement said.
The fuel produced was used to power the engine of a small model aircraft, the researchers said.

The process could be ramped up to produce a replacement for jet fuel at a cost of $3 to $6 per gallon within a decade, the researchers said. That step would come on land, with versions to be used on ships coming later, they said.

Writing on the Navy's official blog this week, Vice Adm. Phil Cullom, deputy chief of Naval Operations for Fleet Readiness and Logistics, also called the new technology "game changing" and potentially life saving.

"After more than a decade of war, our adversaries have found certain soft underbellies to our operations. They know that when you go after the logistics and resupply of fuel, that's an easier target than confronting our frontline forces. What if we removed that from the equation? Can you imagine a time when an aircraft carrier doesn't have to wait for the oiler to come steaming alongside it to deliver jet fuel? It truly does change things. It prevents what could one day be our 'maritime IED moment,'" Cullom wrote.


The mini-turbine on that Peterbilt could be a start, soon as we just use the earth's magnetic field to power it instead.

[jacksmar]

sunisinus, I knew of development on the Zumwalt back in 2005. I had forgotten about this. Thanks for the article.

[jacksmar]

Fluoride is like everything else, there is a healthy level and a harmful one.

All water has fluoride in it just at different levels. There are places where water has naturally higher levels than any place where fluoride is added to the water supply because it's low.

Fluoride in your water is just about the last thing you should be worrying about as a middle aged man in America, it's like thinking being eaten by a dragon is more of a risk than heart disease.

Thanks for calling me middle aged. I'm on the downside of that because I think the average age for a US male is 76 or 77.

I don't know the first thing about fluoride other than the healthy teeth line.

Which goes better with Piper ? Fluoridated or non fluoridated? :cool:

[Kristy]

At all...
http://freakoutnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Jones.jpghttp://digital-photography.org/digitalphotographyweeklyreview/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/green-parrot.jpg

[Seshmeister]

One, a laser weapon prototype, will be tested aboard the amphibious transport dock USS Ponce in the Persian Gulf this summer, the Navy said.

The Ponce????

What the fuck were they thinking...? :D


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ponce

[ELVIS]

I don't know the first thing about fluoride other than the healthy teeth line.



Water Fluoridation = Profitable Toxic Waste Disposal!

Link! (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/11/dr-bill-osmunson-on-fluoride.aspx)

China does NOT allow water fluoridation because it's too toxic and causes damage, according to their studies. Instead, the waste product from their phosphate fertilizer industry is shipped to the United States, where we add it to our water supply!

This is a very important point: the fluoride added to your water is NOT pharmaceutical grade. It's a toxic industrial waste product, which is also contaminated with lead, arsenic, radionucleotides, aluminum and other industrial contaminants.

About 75 percent of Americans get fluoridated water, and just over 65 percent have artificially fluoridated water with hydrofluorosilicic acid; the toxic waste product from phosphate industries. Meanwhile, naturally occurring fluoride is found in many water supplies, especially in volcanic regions and areas with harder water.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not distinguish between these two types of fluoride, but they should.

Naturally occurring fluoride in hard water areas often has a calcium fluoride. Calcium and fluoride bond very well and are not absorbed well by your body. Hydrofluorosilicic acid, on the other hand, dissolves easier and is absorbed by your body at a greater rate.

Natural calcium fluoride is about 1,000 times less toxic than hydrofluorosilicic acid or sodium fluoride, and this is because your body can't absorb nearly as much. (Note: Sodium fluoride is pharmaceutical grade fluoride, which is used in most studies, but NOT the kind added to water supplies.)

Evidence of Brain Damage from Fluoride Exposure is Mounting

Amazingly, there are no less than 23 studies from four different countries indicating that even moderate exposure to fluoride lowers IQ in children.

As recently as December 2010, a study reporting an association with exposure to fluoride and lowered IQ in children was pre-published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials. According to the authors:

"Our study suggested that low levels of fluoride exposure in drinking water had negative effects on children's intelligence and dental health and confirmed the dose–response relationships between urine fluoride and IQ scores as well as dental fluorosis."

This study indicates a 5 point lowering in IQ as the fluoride level in drinking water went from about 0.3 ppm to 3.0 ppm. Dr. Osmunsen also expresses deep concerns about the economic impact of brain damage, stating that you lose about $500 to $1000 dollars per year in income for every IQ point that is dropped.

"No one fixes IQ," he says. "This is an irreparable, irreversible damage that's happening to our public.

When you look at the bell curve of human distribution of intelligence, at the very bottom, way down there at the end, is what we scientifically call the mentally retarded. When you skew IQ five points down, that means that you're doubling the number of mentally retarded and you're halving the number of gifted and everybody else moves on down."

In a nutshell, everyone drinking fluoridated water on a regular basis is getting less intelligent across the board…

So, Does Fluoride Benefit Your TEETH?

The early historic studies on fluoridation found that naturally occurring fluoride also happens to be found in areas that are high in calcium and other minerals. According to Dr. Osmunson, many dentists at the time theorized that this higher mineral content might be the real reason for the reduction in tooth decay.

There were some compelling studies showing that fluoride made teeth harder and more able to withstand acids. However, upon further review of the research literature, Dr. Osmunson realized that the evidence supporting fluoride really wasn't as strong as initially touted, and fluoride did not appear to reduce tooth decay to any significant degree.

In fact, he discovered plenty of scientific evidence showing that areas with LESS fluoride had less decay.

"One of the things we found out is that socioeconomics is a key factor," he says. "You can't compare the rich and the poor, otherwise you're going to find a change. And you must get the [tooth] eruption cycles correct. There are many other confounding factors that play a role.

So I said, "What's a logical way of looking at this?

A public health intervention should be measured in the community at large.

That's one of our precepts and rules. You should be able to measure the effectiveness of the public health intervention in the public at large. You should see a reduction in cost for treatment.

We have fluoride that we're in essence giving like a vaccination. We're giving it to people. And what do we find?

I could only find one study published of measured evidence. All the other studies were estimates based on assumptions. So we don't really have good measured evidence. The study that measured evidence found... about one-half percent savings.

Interestingly enough, when looking at the two largest communities of the children, the children in the non-fluoridated community has less cavities, less costs, than those in the fluoridated community. But in any case, there was a slight improvement—enough to pay for the repairs of the equipment. Not enough for the chemicals. Not enough for putting in the equipment.

Not enough for any side effects of the fluoride but just enough for repair on the equipment, and almost no health benefit…"


:elvis:

[Seshmeister]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/t1.0-9/10004013_10152333819295351_4354295918440138098_n.j pg

[ELVIS]

FACT !!

Water isn't the only thing in that BPA bottle...

Dumbass...

[ELVIS]

LINK! (http://www.qawf.org/pages/ActuallyInWater.html)

The three Fluoride chemicals that could be added to Queensland water supplies for fluoridation are Hydrofluorosilicic Acid, Sodium Silicofluoride or Sodium Fluoride.

Hydrofluorosilicic Acid and Sodium Silicofluoride are collectively known as the Silicofluorides and are the chemicals used most in other Australian states fluoridation schemes. The two Silicofluorides chemicals used, are waste products of Phosphate fertilizer manufacture. They are industrial grade, not pharmaceutical grade products and can contain small residues of toxic heavy metals such as cadmium, mercury or lead.

The two Silicofluoride compounds used DO NOT EVEN OCCUR IN NATURE, yet fluoridation promoters call fluoride "NATURAL”. No toxicology studies have ever been performed on the Silicofluoride used in water fluoridation schemes. The only toxicology studies ever done, have been done on Pharmaceutical grade Sodium Fluoride as is used in toothpaste.

Currently less than 5% of Queensland's population drinks fluoridated water. Sodium Fluoride is a waste product of Aluminium smelting and is the fluoridation chemical used in Queensland in Dalby, Mareeba, Moranbah and Townsville/ Thuringowah.

Freedom of Information reveals that water supply of Bamaga is fluoridated with a Silicofluoride and that Sodium Fluoride used in other Queensland areas is imported from China.

It would appear that most of the Queenslanders that are currently drinking fluoridated water are drinking water fluoridated with imported Chinese industry waste products, probably sourced as a waste product of the Chinese Aluminium smelting industry.

Water from rivers, creeks or dams does contain small amounts of natural fluoride. Levels of fluoride in SE Qld surface waters are usually only about 0.1 parts per million, or nine times less the amount of the Fluoride that Queensland Government plans on adding to Brisbane's water supply.

Fluoride occurs naturally in water when water flows though or over rocks and abrades rocks that contain Fluorspar, or Calcium Fluoride (Ca F2). Calcium fluoride is very insoluble. Water that contains natural Fluoride from abraded Fluorspar containing rocks also contains Calcium which can offer some protection from Fluoride. Fluoride binds with Calcium readily and Calcium is given as a treatment for Fluoride poisoning.

Calcium Fluoride (the natural form of Fluoride) is not permitted to be added to any Australian water supply.

Groundwater as in bore water or well water can contain very high levels of "natural" fluoride and in parts of China, India and the Rift Valley, natural Fluoride has led to devastating health effects such as crippling Skeletal Fluorosis for millions of people. Arsenic, Lead and Mercury are also "natural". Natural does not necessarily mean good or desirable.

The Silicofluoride compounds used for water fluoridation are very acidic and addition to water often entails addition of other chemicals such as soda ash to neutralize the acidity to prevent corrosion of water reticulation equipment. Appendix one of the 1999 NHMRC Review of water fluoridation was a questionaire for Councils which fluoridate and included a request for any evidence for Fluoride incompatibilities, such as enhanced corrosion or breakdown of gaskets or seals, in the water distribution network.

The Queensland Government has said they would pay the setting up costs of fluoridation, but will not be paying for any recurrent and on going costs. Any Fluoride caused corrosion problems in water treatment plants or water reticulation systems would be to the future cost of Councils and ratepayers.


:elvis:

[Nickdfresh]

nick, e doesn't need me for anything.

.

Right, you might have fluoride in your cock...

[Nickdfresh]

That just shows you know nothing about an internal combustion engine...

What do you know about it, pinhead? Like the fact that only a small percentage of fuel (gas, etc.) is actually converted into energy?

So, "fluoride" is bad for you, but the CO2 and god knows WTF is coming out of older diesel and gas engines in good for you? Don't you have a ball of yarn to keep you occupied all day?

[Nickdfresh]

China does NOT allow water fluoridation because it's too toxic and causes damage, according to their studies. Instead, the waste product from their phosphate fertilizer industry is shipped to the United States, where we add it to our water supply!

Ha ha! You're such a retard? you really think China gives a fuck at all about what's in their water? ;)

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSuiR01rWIMsFIjG3yK-8ug7wk5rMb8oWKoUMMzWK1CECw3_vs1

Jesus fuck! That's your "evidence?"

[Angel]

China doesn't add fluoride because there is already naturally occurring fluoride in most of it's sources...

[Nickdfresh]

China doesn't add fluoride because there is already naturally occurring fluoride in most of it's sources...

And a lot of unnaturally occurring shit coming from factories, but that is another story...

[ELVIS]

No it's not another story...

That factory waste is in your drinking water...

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFeeN_BwGFQ

[ELVIS]

He's drunk in that clip...

[FORD]

Doubt that.... I don't think Thom is much of a drinker. Though he has run the occasional ad for an organic wine company on his radio show, so he's not like a Mormon or anything.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqOY6Xw-Wtc

[Nickdfresh]

No it's not another story...

That factory waste is in your drinking water...

No, not really. It's scrupulously filtered out in every major municipality. In China, not so much. They have regular environmental protests held in every major town, fuckwit. But good thing you have them as some sort of ideal...

Hey, Efuckwit, can you tell us China's perspective on human rights? LOL? Really?

[jacksmar]

All those Hollywood producers have million dollar beach houses in Malibu. They know they will be as fucked as the rest of us when the sea levels rise. It could be completely in their own self interest to push this agenda. If it gets through the KKKoch propaganda that's brainwashing ELVIS and Jerksmear and those like them, I'm OK with that. Not that either of them will probably be convinced, but others might be.

I don't subscribe to Showtime, so I have no interest in promoting it myself. Will I watch it? Maybe... if I can find it in the same places I found Dexter or House of Lies.



when the sea levels rise.

Breaking wind - TURD knows when the sea levels rise.

When the sea levels rise.................. date and time please turd.

Or maybe ..................... a prediction???????????

(can't wait for this one!!!!!!!!!!!!)

[ELVIS]

No, not really. It's scrupulously filtered out in every major municipality.

That's fucking bullshit...

[Seshmeister]

when the sea levels rise.

Breaking wind - TURD knows when the sea levels rise.

When the sea levels rise.................. date and time please turd.

Or maybe ..................... a prediction???????????

(can't wait for this one!!!!!!!!!!!!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise

[jacksmar]

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/21/sea-level-geoscience-retract-siddall

Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels
Study claimed in 2009 that sea levels would rise by up to 82cm by the end of century – but the report's author now says true estimate is still unknown

[Seshmeister]

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/what-are-chances-climate-change-natural

What Are The Chances That Climate Change Is "Natural"?

April 14, 2014 | by Justine Alford


http://www.iflscience.com/sites/www.iflscience.com/files/styles/ifls_large/public/blog/%5Bnid%5D/452px-2006_temp_anom_0.gif?itok=o7K2vjkQ


A new study which statistically analyzed temperature data over the pre-industrial period and the industrial period has rejected the hypothesis that global warming is due to natural variability at confidence levels greater than 99%. The results have been published in the journal Climate Dynamics.

Although there is a large body of evidence to suggest that current global warming is largely due to human activities, much of this has relied on models called general circulation models (GCMs). GCMs are computer-driven models that are key components of global climate models, which as the name suggests are used for modeling climate. Although they are useful tools, some are skeptical as to whether they can really infer connections between anthropogenic factors and global warming. This, coupled with the fact that there has been a tendency to over-rely on them when making assertions, has created a need for empirically based methodologies to complement the GCMs.

Professor Shaun Lovejoy from the McGill University used data from the (mostly) pre-industrial period (1500-1900) and the industrial period (1880-2000), and calculated the probability that global warming since 1880 is due to natural temperature fluctuations, rather than man-made emissions, using statistical analysis.

In order to assess natural variation in climate prior to the industrial period, Lovejoy used both fluctuation-analysis techniques which allow an understanding of temperature variations over different time scales, and multi-proxy climate reconstructions. These reconstructions make use of data derived from sources such as tree rings and ice cores.

To do the same for the industrial period, he used CO2 production from fossil fuel burning as a broad surrogate for all anthropogenic (man-made) forcings. He claimed that this is justified because of the relationship between the emission of greenhouse gases and particulate pollution with global economic activity.

The conclusion drawn from the data was clear- he rejected the natural variability hypothesis with confidence levels of over 99%. It is necessary to understand that rejecting one hypothesis does not prove another- his data therefore does not prove that global warming has an anthropogenic causation. However, the results do enhance the credibility of this ulterior hypothesis.

It is also very important to point out that the confidence levels are likely to be exaggerated since the data used for the pre-industrial era cannot be 100% certain as measurements were taken in an indirect manner, since temperature data was not recorded 500 years ago. Therefore there is a degree of uncertainly in this data, which would inherently affect the statistical confidence. However, this does not mean that his overall conclusion is invalid, and this still remains an important study.

The data generated by the study also allowed Lovejoy to make predictions like those recently published by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC predict that if atmospheric CO2 levels double, the climate will increase by between 1.9-4.2oC. Lovejoy’s data complemented this with predictions of temperature rises between 1.5-4.5oC.

While this is just one study, it does add to the ever growing body of evidence that the global warming we are experiencing cannot solely be attributed to natural fluctuations in temperatures.

[ELVIS]

Hogwash...

[Nickdfresh]

Hogwash...
http://www.millionmonkeytheater.com/moviepics5/bod19.jpg

Oh my! How will science ever overcome this retort?

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJJ-sWb0kBE

[jacksmar]

The "population bomb" scare of the 60s/70s Solution: more global socialism.

The "Little Ice Age" fad? Solution: more global socialism.

The Global Warming fad? Solution: Again, the only thing that can save us is more global socialism.



Club Baby Seal: Coming To A Desert Near You!!!!