PrisonPlanet Forum
May 21, 2013, 09:18:50 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ClimateGate - They want you to live like a slave  (Read 12656 times)
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #40 on: March 17, 2012, 12:58:00 PM »

Bump for Armand Hammer and the Ukraine Starvation culling

http://www.autographdomain.com/detail.aspx?ID=7051


INDUSTRIALIST & PHILANTHROPIST ARMAND HAMMER — SIGNED PHOTO
HE BRAGGED THAT HE WAS THE ONLY MAN TO HAVE KNOWN BOTH LENIN AND RONALD REAGAN
 
 
Armand Hammer (1898–1990) ... He went to the Soviet Russia in 1921 to provide medical aid to famine victims and was persuaded by Lenin to remain. His ventures, including a pencil-manufacturing firm, were bought out by the Soviets in the late 1920s, and he returned to the U.S. laden with artworks formerly owned by the Romanov family.
...
He often bragged that he was the only man to have known both Vladimir Lenin and Ronald Reagan.
...
Color 8x10 photo is signed by Hammer in white margin at the bottom. Note: Top margin has NOT been trimmed; photo measures a full 8 x 10”. In exc. condition. net
 
$125.00

Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #41 on: April 04, 2012, 08:57:33 PM »

http://iceagenow.info/2012/01/glaciers-growing-kilimanjaro-guide-insists/
Glaciers are growing on Kilimanjaro, guide insists
 By Robert On January 25, 2012

“From 2010 to now, we have been seeing new glaciers,” says guide.
 
Athumani Juma, a guide who’s been hiking Mount Kilimanjaro for the past seven years, laughed when asked about the likelihood that Kilimanjaro’s snowcap would soon disappear.
 
The glaciers are no longer are shrinking, but growing, Juma replied.
 
“Before, we were seeing glaciers melting,” Juma explained during a recent descent from the summit. “But from 2010 to now, we have been seeing new glaciers.”
 
Some scientists and environmental activists claim that the mountain’s glaciers could disappear perhaps before the end of the decade, another victim of rising global temperatures.
 
See entire article:
 http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2012/jan/24/glaciers-are-growing-back-on-kilimanjaro-guide/

...

The glaciers atop Kilimanjaro’s highest peak, Kibo, are indeed melting, but not because of climate change, he said. They’ve been receding steadily since at least 1880.

“According to our understanding, the Kibo glaciers shrink and will disappear not because of changing climate conditions but because of conditions that are unfavorable in principle: It is simply too dry for these glaciers to exist under normal Holocene conditions,” he emailed.
Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #42 on: April 04, 2012, 09:26:22 PM »

Hudson Bay polar bear population defying predictions, Nunavut survey says

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1156756--hudson-bay-polar-bear-population-defying-predictions-nunavut-survey-says?bn=1

April 04, 2012

IQALUIT, NUNAVUT—Nunavut says a new survey shows Canada’s polar bear population hasn’t significantly declined in the last seven years as predicted and that the iconic mammal has not been hurt by climate change.

An aerial survey done in August by the Nunavut government, in response to pressure from Inuit, estimated the western Hudson Bay bear population at around 1,000.

That’s about the same number of bears found in a more detailed study done in 2004. That study, which physically tagged the bears, predicted the number would decline to about 650 by 2011.

Last year’s survey found fewer cubs — about 50 — than in previous years, but officials say the new figures show the “doom-and-gloom” predictions of environmentalists about the demise of the polar bear have failed to come true.

“People have tried to use the polar bear as a bit of a poster child — it’s a beautiful animal and it grabs the attention of the public — to make people aware of the impact of climate change,” said Drikus Gissing, Nunavut’s director of wildlife management.

“We are not observing these impacts right at this moment in time. And it is not a crisis situation as a lot of people would like the world to believe it is.”

(cont'd at above link)
Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #43 on: October 14, 2012, 08:00:29 PM »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html

Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it

•The figures reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012 there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures
•This means that the ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996

By David Rose
 
PUBLISHED: 16:42 EST, 13 October 2012 | UPDATED: 20:21 EST, 13 October 2012
...
Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #44 on: October 18, 2012, 10:40:30 PM »

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/18/president-obamas-taxpayer-backed-green-energy-failures/
President Obama’s Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
Ashe Schow
October 18, 2012

It is no secret that President Obama’s and green-energy supporters’ (from both parties) foray into venture capitalism has not gone well. But the extent of its failure has been largely ignored by the press. Sure, single instances garner attention as they happen, but they ignore past failures in order to make it seem like a rare case.
...

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:
 1.Evergreen Solar ($24 million)*
 2.SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
 3.Solyndra ($535 million)*
 4.Beacon Power ($69 million)*
 5.AES’s subsidiary Eastern Energy ($17.1 million)
 6.Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
 7.SunPower ($1.5 billion)
 8.First Solar ($1.46 billion)
 9.Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
 10.EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
 11.Amonix ($5.9 million)
 12.National Renewable Energy Lab ($200 million)
 13.Fisker Automotive ($528 million)
 14.Abound Solar ($374 million)*
 15.A123 Systems ($279 million)*
 16.Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($6 million)
 17.Johnson Controls ($299 million)
 18.Schneider Electric ($86 million)
 19.Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
 20.ECOtality ($126.2 million)
 21.Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
 22.Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
 23.Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
 24.Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
 25.Range Fuels ($80 million)*
 26.Thompson River Power ($6.4 million)*
 27.Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
 28.LSP Energy ($2.1 billion)*
 29.UniSolar ($100 million)*
 30.Azure Dynamics ($120 million)*
 31.GreenVolts ($500,000)
 32.Vestas ($50 million)
 33.LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($150 million)
 34.Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
 35.Navistar ($10 million)
 36.Satcon ($3 million)*
 
*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy

[ As a side note - as the fedres needs to print money (to print the money they need a request from the treasury) - a reverse flow occurs where the congress has to create budget requirements to keep up with all the dollars that fedres needs to create. So the powers that be don't care what the money is spent on except preferrably directed to thier friends. ]
Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #45 on: January 21, 2013, 02:15:34 PM »

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/22/us/politics/climate-change-prominent-in-obamas-inaugural-address.html?_r=0
Climate Change Given Prominence in Obama’s Address
 
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON and JOHN M. BRODER
 
Published: January 21, 2013

WASHINGTON — President Obama made addressing climate change the most prominent policy vow of his second Inaugural Address on Monday, setting in motion what Democrats say will be a deliberately paced but aggressive campaign built around the use of his executive powers to sidestep Congressional opposition.

"We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” Mr. Obama said, at the start of eight full sentences on the subject, more than he devoted to any other specific area. “Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.”
...
Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #46 on: March 08, 2013, 01:38:51 PM »

Here we go again .... They needed to keep coming up with studies to keep their Globalist paid jobs...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/08/hawaii-climate-change-second-greatest-annual-rise-emissions
Large rise in CO2 emissions sounds climate change alarm

Hopes for 'safe' temperature increase within 2C fade as Hawaii station documents second-greatest emissions increase
John Vidal
guardian.co.uk, Friday 8 March 2013 05.55 EST

The chances of the world holding temperature rises to 2C – the level of global warming considered "safe" by scientists – appear to be fading fast with US scientists reporting the second-greatest annual rise in CO2 emissions in 2012.

Carbon dioxide levels measured at at Mauna Loa observatory in Hawaii jumped by 2.67 parts per million (ppm) in 2012 to 395ppm, said Pieter Tans, who leads the greenhouse gas measurement team for the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The record was an increase of 2.93ppm in 1998.

The jump comes as a study published in Science on Thursday looking at global surface temperatures for the past 1,500 years warned that "recent warming is unprecedented", prompting UN climate chief, Christiana Figueres, to say that "staggering global temps show urgent need to act.

 Rapid climate change must be countered with accelerated action."

Tans told the Associated Press the major factor was an increase in fossil fuel use. "It's just a testament to human influence being dominant", he said. "The prospects of keeping climate change below that [two-degree goal] are fading away."
...

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6124/1198.abstract
Science 8 March 2013:
Vol. 339 no. 6124 pp. 1198-1201
DOI: 10.1126/science.1228026
•Report
A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years

Surface temperature reconstructions of the past 1500 years suggest that recent warming is unprecedented in that time. Here we provide a broader perspective by reconstructing regional and global temperature anomalies for the past 11,300 years from 73 globally distributed records. Early Holocene (10,000 to 5000 years ago) warmth is followed by ~0.7°C cooling through the middle to late Holocene (<5000 years ago), culminating in the coolest temperatures of the Holocene during the Little Ice Age, about 200 years ago. This cooling is largely associated with ~2°C change in the North Atlantic. Current global temperatures of the past decade have not yet exceeded peak interglacial values but are warmer than during ~75% of the Holocene temperature history.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change model projections for 2100 exceed the full distribution of Holocene temperature under all plausible greenhouse gas emission scenarios
Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #47 on: March 22, 2013, 09:46:54 AM »

AL GORE HAMMER and Sickle is at it again:

http://blog.algore.com/2013/03/time_has_come_for_a_carbon_tax.html

"Time has come" for a carbon tax March 21, 2013 : 8:28 PM

Last weekend, the Financial Times published a must-read editorial on the need for a national carbon tax:

"Taxes are always a regrettable necessity, but some are less regrettable than others. A tax that strengthens energy security and cuts pollution, while minimising the damage done to employment and investment, is one of the least regrettable of all."

"Yet a carbon tax, which has all those characteristics, is struggling to find support from the US administration or in Congress. It deserves much wider enthusiasm."
...
"Carbon taxes have their drawbacks, it is true, but their problems are mostly fixable. They are regressive, but that could be offset by changes to other taxes. They can create difficulties for energy-intensive sectors, but those could be eased with targeted reliefs."
Logged
TahoeBlue
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,406


« Reply #48 on: May 16, 2013, 12:31:23 PM »

notice that "peer reviewed" paid for papers say:

"A survey of thousands of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals has found 97.1% agreed that climate change is caused by human activity"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/16/climate-research-nearly-unanimous-humans-causes
[Paid for ] Climate research nearly unanimous on human causes, survey finds

Of more than 4,000 academic papers published over 20 years, 97.1% agreed that climate change is anthropogenic

Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 15 May 2013 19.01 EDT

A survey of thousands of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals has found 97.1% agreed that climate change is caused by human activity.

Authors of the survey, published on Thursday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, said the finding of near unanimity provided a powerful rebuttal to climate contrarians who insist the science of climate change remains unsettled.

The survey considered the work of some 29,000 scientists published in 11,994 academic papers. Of the 4,000-plus papers that took a position on the causes of climate change only 0.7% or 83 of those thousands of academic articles, disputed the scientific consensus that climate change is the result of human activity, with the view of the remaining 2.2% unclear.

The study described the dissent as a "vanishingly small proportion" of published research.

"Our findings prove that there is a strong scientific agreement about the cause of climate change, despite public perceptions to the contrary," said John Cook of the University of Queensland, who led the survey.

Public opinion continues to lag behind the science. Though a majority of Americans accept the climate is changing, just 42% believed human activity was the main driver, in a poll conducted by the Pew Research Centre last October.

"There is a gaping chasm between the actual consensus and the public perception," Cook said in a statement.
...
"The public perception of a scientific consensus on AGW [anthropogenic, ie man-made, global warming] is a necessary element in public support for climate policy," the study said.
...
Jon Krosnick, professor in humanities and social sciences at Stanford university and an expert on public opinion on climate change, said: "I assume that sceptics would say that there is bias in the editorial process so that the papers ultimately published are not an accurate reflection of the opinions of scientists."
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.17 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!