AGW As A Campaign Issue

Rumor has it that Obama is going to use AGW as a political issue this fall.

If I were a Warmer, I'd be terrified of having my position tied to an unpopular politician.

If he politicizes the issue (more than it already is) and loses, the issue is dead for at least a generation.

 

The population is fickle. After the very warm spring, they believe again, and it's the disbelievers who are met with ridicule now. That could change again after a cold winter, but for this season, the warmers have the upper hand.

 

The facts aren't 'fickle'. Anthropogenic global warming is a reality and that reality is supported by mountains of evidence and virtually all of the scientists on the planet. The evidence just gets more obvious and undeniable. Undeniable to everyone who isn't a clueless brainwashed retard or dupe of the fossil fuel industry's propaganda campaign or who isn't a paid stooge for them, that is.

Pointing out the rightwing's bought&paidfor anti-science insanity and denial of reality is probably going to be a good strategy for Obama and the democrats. Particularly since 2012 may well end up being the newest 'hottest year on record', surpassing 2010 and 2005 for that position. Already the US has experienced record warmth for the first three months of this year, with average temperatures an incredible 6 degrees F above the long term average. Here's some info on the most recent hottest 12 month period.


Warmest 12-Month Period on Record
AccuWeather/com
Dec 29, 2010
(excerpts)

The 12-month period from December 2009 through November 2010 was the warmest on record globally, according to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

The average land and ocean combined temperature anomaly for the period was .65 Celsius or 1.17 F above the 1951-1980 global mean, beating the previous warmest 12-month period of +.62 Celsius during 2005. Third place is currently held by 2007 with a reading of +.61 Celsius.



© 2012 AccuWeather, Inc. All Rights Reserved

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

 

So you are all-in for an agenda of sharply higher taxation and regulation, in ayear where taxation and regulation are THE major issue?

 

Greedy, short-sighted, business-as-usual policies on energy sources may seem 'better' to the ignorant, clueless, confused, brainwashed or severely retarded portions of the population but the global warming/climate change crisis is very real and requires a collective response from humanity even stronger and more focused than America's response to our country's entry into World War II. Just like then, our lives, our descendants and the survival of our civilization depend on our effectively dealing with the crisis. So, little dude, I am "all-in for an agenda" of doing whatever is necessary to get mankind weaned off of environmentally destructive fossil fuels and into clean renewable energy sources. We have to cease adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere as soon as we possibly can, regardless of how that effects the profits of the fossil fuel industry. People in America during WWWII made sacrifices, paid higher taxes and worked hard to defeat some enemies (Germany and Japan) that threatened our existence. Now we face an even bigger and more deadly challenge but our response is being corrupted and delayed by the confusion and doubt deliberately created by the fossil fuel industry in an attempt to maintain their profit stream no matter the consequences to the country, the world, the ecology, and humanity. Their well funded propaganda campaign even employs paid agents of disinformation who troll the internet posting lies, misinformation and propaganda, just like the stuff you post all the time.

So, I guess we could say that you are all-in for an agenda of sticking your head in the sand, pretending that anthropogenic global warming/climate change isn't happening and continuing with a business-as-usual policy of burning up all of the remaining fossil fuels, eh TC?

 

livefree posted;
"...the ignorant, clueless, confused, brainwashed or severely retarded portions of the population..."


Taxcutter says:
Your arrogant condescension doesn't exactly win friends and influence people.

 

I call 'em like I see 'em and I guess the truth hurts but please note that 'winning friends' is not my goal here. Using accurate scientific facts and evidence and the testimony of the world's foremost climate scientists to refute the idiotic, economically/politically motivated misinformation and lies about anthropogenic global warming/climate changes posted by the deluded dupes of the fossil fuel industry is what I'm doing here.

 

It will not take a generation and a lot of the deniers in politics will be out of a job as temps rise, sea level rises, and crops fail

Government will most likely exempt the real polluters, raise taxes, and reduce personal freedom.

I am not a denier but I like to think I am a realist...we are in deep trouble.

 

Taxcutter says: Bring it on!

We can dispose of Obama and AGW in a single election.

 

I doubt Obama, or anyone on the left raises this as much of an issue.

As we speak their agenda is being implemented by stealth by the EPA. Those who are fastening tyranny upon us won't want to draw attention to the issue b/c they're winning the war behind the scenes. If the American people really understood the radical environmentalist agenda - the EPA would cease to exist tomorrow; but the American people have been indoctrinated in the government schools, so the likelihood that the average American gets any of this figured out is remote.

The EPA and Agenda 21 are 2 of the most dangerous battle fronts currently being fought in the freedom war.

Unfortunately, most Americans are too dull to figure it out.

 

I hope so. That is just what we need is Obama reminding us just how much he wasn't energy prices to skyrocket. But hey with Michelle and Jarret advising him anything is possible.

 

AGW is not going away - and it won't any time soon

 

So, assuming that the temperature proxies are accurate, your graph shows that the earths temperature is increasing slightly. From that you infer AGW (emphasis on the A)

News flash for you, yes the temperature may wel be going up. It is called an interglacial, been doing it for a few thousand years now...and when it stops and starts gong down, then in about 3 - 10 k more years New York will be covered with 3 miles of ICE........

Been going on for a LONG time now without the help of my SUV.......

and BTW, since you put on that rant and rave about the fossil fuel industry (Of which I am a part) unless you cut the electricity from your house about 60% of the time, you are a hypocrite....

 

Can Obama sell increased taxation and regulation to combat alleged global warming?

 

they are

That is correct

incorrect - from that AND a whole lot of other data from other research

However the current warming over the last 50 years is unconnected to the solar output - the usual driver of interglacial temperature change

Yes but that is 3 - 10 thousand years away - climate change is happening NOW

That is the old bushfire excuse - just because there have been bush fires without man then man cannot cause bush fires - sorry WRONG!!

a

Interesting that the only ones who ever make these sort of statements are denialists

 

Hi BB, long time so see....

Your response it full of assumptions and illogical statements(like the only people who deny AGW are denialists....).....it is what you WANT to believe, not what is.

You still squawking that same tired old line. (shakes head)

1) the climate models have failed utterly. Scientific methods demands that a theory be abandoned or greatly modified when its predictions fail.

2) Alarmist have been caught soooooo many times manipulating data, lying and stealing to get their way

3) Even the IPCC has had to stop squawking the political line as so few people listen any more


The only ones still clinging to thei worn out fairy tale are:
a) politicians that have hitched their wagons to the AGW star to tightly to let go
b) "scientists" who have done the same
c) people who have a psychological (near pathological) need for a constant doomsday scenario to make it through life because real world problems are too much for them

So get yourself an new Sword of Damocles......AGW is dead

 

And yours wasn't? As I get older I have developed a rule - I respond to assumptions with assumptions. I no s spend hours researching answers for people who post "Duh! I don' fink it's happening' coz dere's deez geezers wot's made stuff up" You support your arguments I will support mine - but I do reserve the right to tell you when you are wrong

Yep! because every single day there is new research proving AGW and less research proving - now what is it exactly you want to prove - that the globe is not warming? That climate change is not happening? or merely that man is innocent and like the naughty school kid you don't have to clean up after yourself

Got Proof? Thought not - and you will not find any proof in any credible source for this allegation

I have a standing bet which not one denialist has ever taken me up on. $50 donation to this site if you can prove that there is more manipulation of data in the science reports than there is in the denialist websites - I will even make it fair for you - you get to choose the denialist site you think is above reproach - if you like you can choose a moderator to review the two sides of the debate

Yeah! Sure! With the fifth assessment report coming out middle of next year - THAT is really correct - NOT

No, but I do love the depth of denial

 

How thick was the ice on your lakes (on average) during the 1960s and seventies?

When I lived at Tri Lakes Indiana in the 1960s we would get at least 8 inches of ice every winter.

How much do you get now?

 

I have a standing bet which not one denialist has ever taken me up on. $50 donation to this site if you can prove that there is more manipulation of data in the science reports than there is in the denialist websites - I will even make it fair for you - you get to choose the denialist site you think is above reproach - if you like you can choose a moderator to review the two sides of the debate

The people here are not idiots BB...how do you prove "more manipulation"...what metric is the measure of manipulation..?? Pounds? Meters?..... You lay a bet that cannot be adjudicated....

The IPCC climate models have failed utterly..that means the AGW theory fails (any scientist knows that-it is the basis of any theory). But if it gives you psychological stability you go on worshiping the Church of Gore

 

Duh! Climate Change happens all the time.

 

Not at this rate it doesn't.............

 

Musta read that on a right-wing blog. Because there's not a hint coming from anywhere else anywhere close to that. Climate has been totally on the back burner for the last four years, why should he start making it an issue now?

By "unpopular politician," I assume you're referring to Mitt Romney? Newt Gingrich? John Boehner?

Two unlikely "ifs" in one sentence. But even if both turn out to be true, the issue isn't dead. Mother Nature has a way of reminding us over and over and over again.

 

Hummmm.........

This is a classic deception used by the "figures don't lie, but liars figure" group and has been adopted by the warmists. They take the last 100 years or so and scream...."UNPRECEDENTED ! DISASTER ! MAN MADE !!!....when in fact it is all natural and explainable if you just step back a little.....

 

tIT is easy to tell that those are from denialist sites because the MWP is shown as having a higher median temperature than now. So tell me do you want this to the the first salvo in the bet about who has the most manipulated data - denialists or "warmists"? I mean I am still up for it - I am betting I will find more manipulation in the denialists excuse for "research" than you can find in any academically supported site

I would love to start with those graphs but unfortunately you have not provided a link

 

LOL...BB You are a riot. At the beginning of the thread when a "warmist" posted the abbreviated graph showing increasing temperatures and i commented based on ASSUMING the proxies to 1880 are correct, you chimed in and declared with no backup whatsoever that they WERE CORRECT. Now, you look at these charts and declare the parts that do not support your doomsday scenario are NOT CORRECT, again with no basis whatsoever......

Must be nice to live in your head, and filter information so that only your point of view is supported..........delightful.....

You just go on now and put your tinfoil hat on.....I've other fish to fry.