Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
Top NASA Scientists: ‘Global Warming’ Is A Hoax >

Top NASA Scientists: ‘Global Warming’ Is A Hoax

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Top NASA Scientists: ‘Global Warming’ Is A Hoax

Old 06-18-2015, 10:10 AM
  #1  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Knightia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 8,582
Default Top NASA Scientists: ‘Global Warming’ Is A Hoax

I see Nasa,s - green guru- man on a mission retired. jame hanson( i always confuse him with o bamas science czar odball)

From what i read it was in question if he was breaking the law/rules- in collecting large sums of money from green groups all the while being very well payed as a public servent/sciientist.

No conflict of intrest( prederemed ageedas &scientific bias there hmm)

Itherway now he can do full time what he has been doing(green guru, rub elbow with the stars, protest coal & pipelines collect vast sums of green money & injoy a nice gov pention



You should see all the coal trains we have here james( that you equate to nazi death camp trains etc) You could stop on by...and do your thing.
The planet is not in danger of catastrophic man made global warming. Even if we burn all the world’s recoverable fossil fuels it will still only result in a temperature rise of less than 1.2 per cent.

So say The Right Climate Stuff Research Team, a group of retired NASA Apollo scientists and engineers – the men who put Neil Armstrong on the moon – in a new report.
“It’s an embarrassment to those of us who put NASA’s name on the map to have people like James Hansen popping off about global warming,” says the project’s leader Hal Doiron.
Doiron was one of 40 ex NASA employees – including seven astronauts – who wrote in April 2012 to NASA administrator Charles Bolden protesting about the organization’s promotion of climate change alarmism, notably via its resident environmental activist James Hansen.
During his stint as head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Hansen tirelessly promoted Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. He retired last year to spend more time on environmental campaigning and has twice been arrested with former mermaid impersonator Darryl Hannah for his part in protests against surface coal mining and the Keystone XL pipe line. While still head of NASA GISS he once described trains carrying coal as “death trains” “no less gruesome than if they were carrying boxcars headed to crematoria and loaded with uncountable irreplaceable species.” Many NASA employees and former employees found his views an embarrassment.

Read more at http://patdollard.com/2014/03/the-me...30ujjkcLFVb.99

Last edited by Knightia; 06-18-2015 at 10:16 AM.
Knightia is offline  
Old 06-18-2015, 10:21 AM
  #2  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

Remember "Dee" from "What's Happening"? Oooooohhhhhh

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...%27s+happening

You can now officially join the "He-Man-Science-Hater's-Club". Congrats!

Jokes aside, I wonder how this will be addressed by the public? You would think these guys would hold the utmost respect in the science community, but after bucking the trend and speaking out against bho's pet agenda--not to mention the "global consensus"...who knows?
LBR is offline  
Old 06-19-2015, 01:20 AM
  #3  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Knightia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 8,582
Default

Nope dont know dee never watched it- my son when young watched he man tho

Just typed a fairly long post & lost it when i clicked it- so this i think will be shorter.

Nope dont think there is any "global consensus"- just more of the same ol stuff- dishonest minipulation of the data & ppl - that there plenty willing( some very) to buy into it(some to focused on things like gender manipulation etc)) A lie is still a lie no matter how many ppl believe it true or pretend its something else whatever there motives,reasons..

Anyways a few examples below(plenty more around)

Cooking Climate Consensus Data: “97% of Scientists Affirm AGW" Debunked


The survey by Australian global-warming activist John Cook, released recently with a massive media sendoff, is rapidly melting, as scientists and statisticians subject it to analysis. And now it's leaking out that Cook’s e-mails show he was scheming on this fraudulent survey to promote a leftist political agenda for well over a year. Cook made a big media splash in May with the publication of a study by him and several co-authors claiming to prove that climate scientists overwhelmingly support the theory that human activity is warming the planet to dangerous levels. Cook’s claims received their biggest boost on May 16, when President Barack Obama tweeted: “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree:#climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.”

The mainstream media and climate-alarmist blogosphere uncritically accepted the Cook study and trumpeted the consensus claims as gospel. We reported on May 21 ("Global Warming 'Consensus': Cooking the Books") on the critiques of the Cook study by experts who show that Cook cooked the data. Out of the nearly 12,000 scientific papers Cook’s team evaluated, only 65 endorsed Cook’s alarmist position. That’s less than one percent, not 97 percent. Moreover, as we reported, the Cook study was flawed from the beginning, using selection parameters designed to weight the outcome in favor of the alarmist position.

In a May 22 follow-up article ("Climate 'Consensus' Con Game: Desperate Effort Before Release of UN Report") The New American reported on additional problems with the Cook study and cited a large and growing list of eminent climate scientists — including Nobel Prize recipients and scientists who served on the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — who challenge the claim that there is any “scientific consensus” on climate change, or that “the science is settled” in favor of the Al Gore alarmist position.

Oops! Guess We Forgot Those

Now comes another devastating analysis of Cook's cooked data from a big name in the climate science community: Professor Richard S. J. Tol. Dr. Tol is a professor of the economics of climate change at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, Netherlands, and a professor of economics at the University of Sussex, England. He has also served on the UN’s IPCC.

Dr. Tol has statistically deconstructed the 97 percent consensus myth of Cook et al.

Professor Tol utilizes four graphs to demonstrate the biased methods utilized by the Cook team to skew the results of their “research.” One of the major “errors” of the study (whether intentional or the result of incompetence) was the use of the term “global climate change” to search the scientific database for papers that were included in the 12,000 tabulated by Cook and his co-authors.

In his first graph, Dr. Tol points out that by including “global” before “climate change,” Cook et al “dropped 75% of papers and changed disciplinary distribution.”

In his second graph, Dr. Tol demonstrates that by including “global” before “climate change,” the supposedly authoritative Cook study conveniently “dropped many papers by eminent climate researchers.” And Tol lists around 50 of those researchers who were “dropped.” These, of course, represent only a small sampling of the thousands of scientists who have expressed various levels of disagreement with the hysterical climate pronouncements of the IPCC, Al Gore, and John Cook.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...m-agw-debunked
When we have public gov servants like this & holden( and many others)& mainstream medias that act like nothing more then a leftist liberal propaganda machine-( yep i see quite a few that are being pressured not to speak up ( in many fields& areas & ways)- if what they have to say disagrees )

Yep he is right in one area here - his- mainstream scientific" opinions" thats all it is so far proving nothing more - then there very willing to be dishonest( and do just about anything)- to fullfill there agendas & take further control of the masses & there lifes.

Obama’s science czar: Opposing climate views outside the ‘mainstream scientific opinion’

White House science czar Dr. John Holdren wasn’t in the mood to be contradicted on whether global warming was causing “extreme weather.” Holdren described climate scientists whose work contradicts the White House’s global warming claims as outside the “scientific mainstream.”What do you think?

Holdren was asked by Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions to cite scientific data that supported claims that droughts and other weather events were being made worse by global warming. Sessions then cited contradicting evidence from climate scientists, including former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer and University of Colorado climate scientist Roger Pielke, Jr.What do you think?

Holdren countered that the likes of Pielke and Spencer “are not representative of the mainstream scientific opinion on this point.”
And at no point will they be unless they agree with him & his likehmm..

Pielke’s research found that “extreme weather” events like hurricanes, tornadoes and wildfires have not increased in frequency or intensity, in contrast to what Democrats and environmentalists argue.What do you think?

“It is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate timescales either in the United States or globally,” Pielke told the Senate last summer. “It is further incorrect to associate the increasing costs of disasters with the emission of greenhouse gases.”What do you think?

Holdren may disagree, but Pielke’s research mirrors the findings of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — often touted by liberals as the global climate authority. The IPCC also concluded in its most recent climate assessment that there is little evidence to suggest that global warming is causing “extreme weather” events to increase.What do you think?

The IPCC found that there “is limited evidence of changes in extremes associated with other climate variables since the mid-20th century.” The UN climate bureaucracy also noted that current data shows “no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century. … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin.”What do you think?

“In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale,” the IPCC notes, adding that “that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century due to lack of direct observations, geographical inconsistencies in the trends.”What do you think?

Dr. Spencer also testified before the Senate last summer that weather has not become more severe in the last century.What do you think?

“There is little or no observational evidence that severe weather of any type has worsened over the last 30, 50, or 100 years, irrespective of whether any such changes could be blamed on human activities, anyway,” he told the Senate committee last year.What do you think?

Holdren has been criticized for being outside the “scientific mainstream” as well. He wrote books and essays advocating government-imposed population controls, forced abortions and putting sterilants in the drinking water.What do you think?

Holdren partnered with fellow scientist Paul Ehrlich on several works advocating for population control, including a 1969 essay entitled “Population and Panaceas: A Technological Perspective” that argued “man’s present technology is inadequate to the task of maintaining the world’s burgeoning billions, even under the most optimistic assumptions.” The essay goes on to argue that technological advancements to increase food supplies would would be fruitless until “the population growth rate drastically reduced.”What do you think?

Holdren and Ehrlich also coauthored a textbook with one another. One book’s passages argued that coercive population control methods could be constitutional.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/26/ob...tific-opinion/
Climate skeptic scientists push back against ‘witch hunt’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/2...st-witch-hunt/

Meanwhile:

Feisty Ala. climate change critic claims Washington is trying to intimidate him

Daniel Cusick, E&E reporter
An Alabama atmospheric scientist who has gained a global reputation as a repudiator of “mainstream climate science” strongly defended his research record at the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH), where he is a distinguished professor and director of the university’s Earth System Science Center.

John Christy, who has been at UAH since 1987, said this week that all of his research funds are derived from state and federal agencies and that he has never accepted research money from business or industry groups that have challenged the scientific findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the National Research Council and other expert bodies.

Nor has he accepted research funding from groups actively engaged in lobbying against U.S. climate change policies, he said.

Moreover, Christy suggested a recently launched congressional investigation into sources of his and other climate scientists’ research funding is an attempt by Democrats in Washington to squelch dissenting opinions about the degree of climate warming and the role that human-generated greenhouse gas emissions have in a shifting climate.

“I’ve been involved in this issue for 25 years, and I’m past the point of being intimidated,” Christy said in an email responding to the inquiry led by House Natural Resources ranking member Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) exploring outside funding to climate researchers at seven U.S. universities.

“This is simply a way for the Administration to publicly draw attention to us as scientists not aligned with their views, implying there must be a scurrilous reason for daring to think the way we do,” he added.
Knightia is offline  
Old 06-19-2015, 02:21 AM
  #4  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 36,264
Default

But it's settled science and all scientist agree. He either didn't get the memo or isn't a scientist like Al Gore. Maybe both.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 06-19-2015, 05:56 AM
  #5  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

Nope dont know dee never watched it- my son when young watched he man tho
Sorry. The "he man" thing was in reference to the Little Rascals.

Surprised you haven't been attacked over your "anti science rants". FWIW, good job.
LBR is offline  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:04 AM
  #6  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Knightia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 8,582
Default

I was was going to mention( not sure why) little racals( my daughter now 41 use to watch that a bit when young)-( dont remember he man on there- then again i dont remember a lot of things

Dont know why the one story above kept on asking ' what do ya think?' pretty sure it wasnt in the txt. FwIw thanks too.

Nah im not anti science- im anti - ppl like o ba mas science czar,s( Bs)(and those like him)- at least afew reasons( one you mentioned here elsewhere i think)...


Havent been on a lot( and i never try to presume i know all whats past
& ongoing- im always the man with one good eye thats not all that great anymore)

I didnt read all this story(yet)- (plenty out there)- its aljeezers- i have seen there news station-i know what threre agendas are....there friends(and many others) would love to get rid(well our /ff industrys anyways) of a state like wy (and when i read storys(i do form all sources( i ussally read the comments/but not aways to- see the masses reactions, thoughts, emotions etc

How i feel about it? Let whoever call us anti science-and they do(plenty) & a lot of other things a lot worse) I dont give a rats arse....what they think or aprove of! ..( could say a lot on the issue but will leave it at that for now)

http://america.aljazeera.com/article...l-warming.html

Wyoming rejects science standards, won't teach man-made climate change


Wyoming rejects science standards, won't teach man-made climate change
Coal-producing state refuses new education benchmarks after officials question human role in global warming
May 9, 2014 2:54PM ET
Wyoming, the U.S.'s leading coal-producer, has become the first state to reject new K-12 science standards put forward by national education groups after officials objected to the teaching of man-made global warming as a fact.

The Wyoming Board of Education decided recently that the Next Generation Science Standards needed more review after questions were raised over the treatment of global warming.

Board President Ron Micheli said the review will look into whether "we can't get some standards that are Wyoming standards and standards we all can be proud of."

But others said the decision was a blow to science education in Wyoming.

"The science standards are acknowledged to be the best to prepare our kids for the future, and they are evidence based, peer reviewed, etc. Why would we want anything less for Wyoming?" Marguerite Herman, a proponent of the national standards, said.

Twelve states have adopted the standards since they were released in April 2013 with the goal of improving science education, and Wyoming is the first to reject them, said Chad Colby, spokesman for Achieve, one of the organizations that helped write the benchmarks.

Last edited by Knightia; 06-20-2015 at 03:08 AM.
Knightia is offline  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:29 AM
  #7  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Knightia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 8,582
Default

And just a Ps- to add As is the ussally case of liberal /leftist story tellers & myth makers....( letim spin there bs & call us what they like) And i invite them all to come protest at the mines whenever they like etc

I have seen no one here say there would not teach about climate science( and i will bet money that will iclude AGW)- What i see said is they will not teach - Man made global warming as - FACT.

Works for me just fine.

( ok end of rant )

Last edited by Knightia; 06-20-2015 at 04:28 AM.
Knightia is offline  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:44 PM
  #8  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

Knightia, the "anti science" thing was a joke. I've been accused of being "anti science" several times because I disagreed with an opinion or theory. Ironically, the same people who called me that have their own disagreements with scientific theory and opinions. I guess you could call it an inside joke--I meant no disrespect.

Good for Wyoming!
LBR is offline  
Old 06-21-2015, 04:12 AM
  #9  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Knightia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 8,582
Default

Thanks LB

In part(but not all- like i mentioned i dont know all thats involved here) i think i understand some.( i will try not to make this to rambling, long etc)( and try not to presume to much)
Some ppl onthis site have implyed i was being anti Christian(in the past)- i know its not true & ya it bothered me some... i have disagreed with ppl on there small details involved- never ever with the main meaning & messages of Christananity.


This is not the best media to try to convy things always- so sometimes meaning, intent,etc get blurry , lost. PPl get defensive- and righty so sometimes (and sometimes its just pure Bs)And a person msg very clear - I try to always treat ppl as they treat me(not that i dont have my bad days etc)


I know i have said some of these things before on this site- I am not aChristian & dont pretend to be( that would be wrong imo) most of my family is. I dont like it one bit or like ppl like bill maher( and plenty of others like him out there in the world)mocking,belittling etc those that may belive differently- like Christians.

But bill mahers a idiot so i guess it cant be helped.I know i mentioned lieing( just a general statement maybe dost fit all situations)) above- i know i memtioned it it the relgious fourm before...One(anyone) cant call someone a lier if what they are saying they really believe to be true(i very much believe that)-

I know i mentioned my son on that form to( a bit) Again a general statement- im pretty sure he believes a bit as you do(young earth etc)


Havent seen him in 7 yrs but he came to visit last mth( and mygrandson) either of us dont do phones (or message etc on these machines

It was great to see them( we only talked of science & scientists a little- it was good)- there are the small details we may never fully agree on- and if its up to me( and it is in part) Those things will never ever divide us, keep us apart, be a problem etc.Hes a good boy( man) & son with a great life & family(7 youngings)i love them all very much- i only have seen( minus the mockers etc of the world) positives come from his beliefs ( the small details involved are not important,it is the main msgs that matters imo) So much for keeping it short hmm?


PPl say never discuss relgion & politices? lol yah- this is the political fourm- i predict we will all never agree on everything & will have our difficences( but i think we have a lot in common either way more then those diffences)


FWIW -i dont think your antiscience LBR or is my son either (i have seen nothing for me to think otherwise) Yep we may have our diffences, not aways agree( things may get a little wierd( including me)- I believe theres good folks here(always have) & that would include you- reguardless of the small details involved & any differences we may have .



( boy do i need a spell checker or what?
Knightia is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.