81 Replies to “Y2Kyoto: Where They Can’t See The Forest”

  1. That’s nice, now justify your comment on sourcewatch.
    Ok you don’t like sourcewatch, just Google yourself Fred Singer or Tim Ball and Exxon to see what comes up.

  2. Yukon I’ve never said the rich steal from the poor. They take advantage of the poor, there’s a difference. As far as the soldiers are concerned, yes the army does indeed brainwash their people, but that’s another story.
    Oh yes and I’m 47, not 48.

  3. Tim Ball receives no money from oil companies. He lives in a leaky condo in Victoria, BC and drives an old car.
    Al Gore collects (takes) money from the easily taken and lives in an outrageous mansion in Tennesee and rides around in his private jet.

  4. I guess Ball blew all his money on that failed law suit.
    As for Gore I could really care less. In my opinion Gore is partly responsible for Bush being in office today. He had the popular vote and didn’t fight for what was his and look where we are today. The only positive things I can say about Gore is one, that he brought climate change to the forefront and two, he isn’t Bush.

  5. I can’t believe I’m trying to discuss this with some ditsy housewife that for some reason thinks she knows something about climate science because she watched a video or two.
    =================================
    Albatross, Albatross, Albatross. You need to learn something about clarity of language and at least stop reading stuff between the lines that isn’t there. I never claimed to know something about climate science because I watched a couple of videos. For the record, I believe the planet is warming. I do not believe those who promote the anthropogenic cause angle have made their case. That’s it. That’s all. Perhaps some day I will be convinced that the warming trend is the result of human activity. At this point, I, like many who do know a lot about climate science, believe the verdict is still out.
    Now, to reflect back in you own face a bit of you own failings. You may believe I am ditsy. That’s your perogative. If that’s how you deal with people who challenge you to make coherent, respectful arguments on an issue that is not yet settled, that’s fine. Some day you might grow up and come to understand what gets in the way of a successful argument.
    However, I am not a housewife, so perhaps you should step back a bit and ask yourself why you would come to that conclusion without any investigation or any evidence of any sort. Could it be you are a might too gullable or ideologically blinded? Nah, of course not.
    For you information, and to help you avoid making embarrassing revelations like that again, I am a professional with two bachelors degrees and a masters degree. The bachelors degrees were granted by the U of S and the masters degree came from a university in Ontario. I have a small library of books and I am a bibliophile. So, sorry to burst your bubble, but I do crack open books on a regular basis.
    One of my favourite subjects is paleoanthroplogy, which, in case you are incapable of putting two plus two together, means I most certainly understand the process of evolution and I am familiar with continental drift.
    Count your lucky stars that there are a vast range of professional disciplines and areas of expertise in our society and not all of them are in climatology. You wouldn’t want you doctor to waste his or her time studying climatology or paleoanthropology, now would you? I’m betting you would want him or her to spend every last minute of his or her seven years in medical school studying medicine, wouldn’t you.
    And here’s a really little gem of wisdom for you. Don’t take your doctor to task with the same churlish and childish vitriol as you have done with me, just because he may not be convinced of anthropogenic causes for global warming. after all he or she has invested a great deal of his or her time, effort and money obtaining expertise in a field you no doubt have not expertise in whatsoever.
    Friendly pursuasion is always the better course, along with a healthy dose of humility.
    Otherwise, you may eventually have to admit you haven’t gotten past square one and have proven nothing to anyone about anything other than the singular most obvious point – namely, you’re a boor.

  6. Ok you don’t like sourcewatch, just Google yourself Fred Singer or Tim Ball and Exxon to see what comes up.
    =====================
    The trouble with googling is it comes up with sites like sourcewatch. It makes no destinction between quantity and quality.

  7. “the army does indeed brainwash their people…”
    Yeah right. With almost 23 years in uniform I’d like to know when I was brainwashed. (Maybe the time I was in CFB St Jean on a french course – that missing ten minutes).
    If there ever was a time I avoided brainwashing it was when I was earning my TWO bachelor degrees at the University of Saskatchewan, and managed to get through some of the leftist claptrap in required classes in both Arts & Sciences and the College of Education.
    If they got rid of those classes that do nothing to teach you about being a teacher, they could shorten it to a one year program…but then all those left-wing profs would have to get real jobs. I even had to write to the Dean to complain about one, but of course had no response.

  8. If there ever was a time I avoided brainwashing it was when I was earning my TWO bachelor degrees at the University of Saskatchewan, and managed to get through some of the leftist claptrap in required classes in both Arts & Sciences and the College of Education.
    ======================
    LOL!! Me, too. Exactly what happened to me. Except I wasn’t so aware of the brainwashing until after I graduated and got out into the real world.

  9. Paleoanthropology now is it? Are you familiar with Elaine Morgan? Or H. neanderthalensis? Or how about the images that appear in the Lascaux Cave? You claim you are a paleoanthropologist and know nothing about the Milankovitch cycle? Now anyone who studies paleoanthropology would have at least an elementary understanding of climate change considering the connection between climate change and humans evolution.
    In your case I call bull. Any degree you might happen to hold was obtained through mail order.

  10. Well “Sarge” in my 25 years in uniform I saw the mindset of infantry, artillery and anyone else who wore a grunt green uniform. They are indeed brainwashed.
    For example, how would you get grown human in their right mind eat feces and bread soaked in urine just so they belong to a group?

  11. You claim you are a paleoanthropologist
    ======================
    Quaduple ROTFLMAO!!! You just can’t read. That’s your problem. Give it up, fella. It must be past your bedtime.

  12. So now you’re not a paleoanthropologist as you would have had us believe? Now what exactly are those mysterious degrees in? Are they a BA B.Sc or a maybe just B.S.?
    But getting back to climate and this should be good for a laugh. You don’t seem to like Milankovitch and may actually be the only person on the planet who is in that position. Now Louise, I have given you the answer to your question, but you don’t seem to like that answer. Even though you don’t like that answer you don’t give me an alternate theory explaining what is going on with these newly exposed trees. What is your explanation of the formerly warm climate and the presently day warming climate? I know what the science says, but I’m not sure what the quacks say. Perhaps you can fill me in (Tapping fingers on desk waiting for Louise to explain herself.)

  13. Albatros39a,
    Maybe you should slow down and read for comprehension prior to pounding on your keyboard.
    Louise said “One of my favourite subjects is paleoanthroplogy”. She didn’t say she is a paleoanthhroplogist.
    That is like me saying one of my favorite subjects is flight. That doesn’t make me a pilot. Get it?
    As to your labeling of her as a “ditzy housewife”, next you will be calling her a Nazi. Either way, you lose (see Godwin’s Law).
    Here is an unsolicited observation: before I retired I spent as many years as you have been alive working in supervision of a number of applied earth sciences. Based on my observations, after having interfaced with hundreds and hundreds of other scientists of varying disciplines through that time, I might suggest that your elect a change in major before you graduate. The way you lash out at people, and the way you are dismissive of all who disagree with you, and the way you dismiss all data that does not support your beliefs, suggest that you will never actually make a living in your chosen field. No one would be able to tolerate your baggage on the payroll for very long.
    I know, I know… I’m just a ditzy old guy. Well, in my time I fired many very good scientists because they had your exact attitude, and unchangeable (unscientific) and dismissive (elitist) approach to other’s ideas. They also lacked the ability to enter into civil discourse.

  14. So now you’re not a paleoanthropologist as you would have had us believe?
    ========================
    I didn’t say I was a paleontologist, dodo bird. Re-read the thread. I said I was very interested in the subject. I have been since I graduated with my first degree way back in 1973. I read the Wikipedia article about Milankovich’s theory and found the article stated quite plainly that there were a lot of problems with the theory. Perhaps you should be more careful in what you choose to post in support of your point of view.
    My answer to your question? I’m not sure exactly what question, but I’ll assume you want to know what I think the trees under the glaciers means. It means we are undergoing a warming period now which hasn’t yet lasted long enough to melt all the glaciers with trees under them and return the ecosystem in those locales to a state where they would support the growth of trees.
    Whether it proves or doesn’t prove anything about the theory of global warming, I couldn’t say, as you well know that the earth has gone through many, many small ups and downs with respect to average temperatures and most of that fluctuation has occurred prior to any possible anthropogenic cause could be identified. Since many of the most zealous global warming fascists will insist that the current warming phase began about 150 years ago, and considering how long the earth’s geologic processes take to unfold, I can’t be convinced that the passage of such a short amount of time is long enough to prove anything about the earth’s surface, especially in the area of climatology, since it is only very recently that the theory of anthropogenic causation has been posited. Universally accepted proof hasn’t yet been achieved.
    Anyway, I’m still waiting for at least a halfway convincing argument from you that you know what you claim to know. The insults you hurl my way prove something quite apart from the subject you and I are talking about, but I suppose maybe you are having fun boring me.

  15. Greenhouse theory nuts count energy twice. They say the earth is warmed by both the sun and the atmosphere.

  16. Kate, any way to display commenters’ names at the top also ??
    I beleive in the benefit of the doubt for anyone — a few times. But when the same mindless drivel runs up in the hundreds —– disgard as damaged goods, scroll past.

  17. Ah Yoop, when you know somebody is BSing you about what they are and you know it, you give them some leeway in what they claim. Yoop when somebody has been making mistakes all along like she has and they say their “favourite subject” was paleoanthropology you have to assume this is just another lump of crap in a long line of crap you play along to see where it takes you. Now if you are really a geologist as I believe you have stated in the past, you should be able to explain Milankovitch to a ditzy housewife like Louise.

  18. Louise, stay away from climate science, you’re not very good at it. Just like many others here.

  20. ron in kelowna,
    If want to see results like this:
    Comment by albatros39a blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]
    Get Firefox and the firefox extensions greasemonkey and killfile. I got the killfile author to add SDA about a year ago.
    Killfile – can be found here:
    http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/4107

  21. SourceWatch
    “As with the online reference Wikipedia, the contents of SourceWatch are written and edited by ordinary Web users. Says SourceWatch: “You don’t need any special credentials to participate — we shun credentialism along with other propaganda techniques.” While stating that it seeks to maintain fairness in the profiles and articles appearing on its website, SourceWatch does acknowledge that “ignoring systemic bias and claiming objectivity is itself one of many well-known propaganda techniques.”
    Anyone else find the irony delicious?

  23. [shun credentialism ] !!??
    No discriminating between smart and dumb, ya see.
    Or between good and poor track records.
    Or working and slack-assing on the beach.
    Sounds like it is straight out of the Hyppies play of the sixties.
    Peace, man. Anti everything —– but just give me a lift to the next love-in —– in your set of wheels, that someone else built. And the road. And the fuel. And ….

  24. You really can be that ignorant about climate science can you?
    So-called “Climate Science” has only been around as an, umm, “legitimate” discipline for a few decades. It is hardly definitive what with shaky data collection standards, tweaked computer models regarding possible future events and doom’n’gloom predictions. Sorry.

  26. “how would you get grown human in their right mind eat feces and bread soaked in urine just so they belong to a group”
    Maybe put them into a university fraternity and tell them they have to eat it to join. FYI. garbage like that isn’t limited to the military. The VanDoos learned that little trick from French Commandos they had trained with earlier – I guess we can call them something other than ‘cheese-eating surrender monkeys’.
    Or to drink their urine, put them in the bottom of the Springhill mine and call it survival.
    http://3w.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,938029,00.html
    As for your 25 years in uniform, what was your MOC? Perhaps one of the soft ones where a shower and proper meal is an everyday occurance, and B&W TV is considered a hardship?

  27. Oh Louise you simple minded tool. Whatever you and David Horowitz think of sourcewatch is irrelevant, the page they have on Tim Ball is spot on. You see Louise, it’s not just the article on sites like sourcewatch and Wikipedia that you need to look at in order to judge the accuracy of their information, you need to look at the references at the bottom that they use to back up their information.

  28. Louise at November 3, 2007 9:38 PM
    That article is actually quite humorous. I don’t suppose you noticed that they have omitted a considerable number of facts in order to cloud the argument. But then again they are trying to sell a book to people like you now aren’t they? The fact is Louise, it is not a good article, it is a manipulative article designed to sell books to the uninformed. I had to stop reading it after the first paragraph of the second page, it was so full of propaganda that it was getting painful to read.

  29. “You’re excusing their actions?”
    I am hardly excusing their actions. I suggest that it is more of an example of groupthink, not brainwashing. Brainwashing refers to controlling the actions of an individual. Groupthink refers to a larger group acting as a single entity, with an ineffective leadership.
    The following from Wikipedia pretty much sums up what some of the problems were in the CF in the late 80s-early 90s, when leadership was motivated by political influence, personal career progression and financial considerations, rather than the effective performance of duty:
    ‘Highly cohesive groups are much more likely to engage in groupthink. The closer they are, the less likely they are to raise questions to break the cohesion. Although Janis sees group cohesion as the most important antecedent to groupthink, he states that it will not invariably lead to groupthink: ‘It is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition’ (Janis, Victims of Groupthink, 1972). According to Janis, (a) group cohesion will only lead to groupthink if one of the following two antecedent conditions is present: (b) Structural faults in the organisation: insulation of the group, lack of tradition of impartial leadership, lack of norms requiring methodological procedures, homogeneity of members’ social background and ideology. (c) Provocative situational context: high stress from external threats, recent failures, excessive difficulties on the decision-making task, moral dilemmas.’

  30. Sarge at November 3, 2007 10:58 PM
    You’re excusing their actions? Irregardless, are you suggesting that eating human excrement is a normal thing that a normal mind would do? No this is a product of brainwashing plain and simple. It may be the extreme example, but there are certainly many more. Obviously you spent your years in the army and would never admit to being brainwashed.
    My MOC was 091, and sure my last 10 years was trotting around the world doing hard Hilton time, but I did do my time in Wainwright and Gagetown. Any idiot can be uncomfortable, but it takes brains to do something about it.

  31. Looks like a bickering fun fest, but what tangible result?
    The electric car and clean coal tech are the two most required solutions to pollution, [ soaring health costs], and wars, [needlessly over valued mid-East oil reserves].
    Better to start with your *proven* solutions and argue their merit rather than waste hot air on a global warming that is probably mostly natural anyway. = TG

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation