Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Shady

The Global Warming Plateau

Recommended Posts

wrong - you talked of the 'end of Kyoto' in Canada... as stated, that correlates directly with Harper Conservatives actions in 2006 - in countering the Kyoto commitments with their own "Made in Canada" emission reduction commitments. No - the only reason you continue to mention Kyoto, to derail thread after thread, most pointedly, with respect to Canada... is you troll for responses to your same inane comments that presume to question/challenge Canada's resolve/commitments to a treaty you yourself called 'stupid'.

Perhaps it is/was insensitive to hammer home Canada's Kyoto FAIL, but it is true and confirmed by treaty withdraw when faced with the obvious sanctions for non-compliance. You can thank PM Harper instead of criticizing him. If "troll" be your oft repeated label for any member who dares to challenge your climate change dogma and rhetoric, then I wear it with pride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as you've been challenged in the past, before we take another shot here, instead of you blindly copying/pasting (parroting) yet another denier blogger, let's have you take a shot at actually laying down your own personal interpretation of that projection - hey? What's the projection based on? What assumptions does he make? Since he doesn't accept that greenhouse gases have an affect on global temperature, what physics/physical-science foundations is he relying upon?

This is an old but always entertaining dance. As stated previously, I already pay for the U.S. research and analysis that you are so dependent on from a "denier nation". Easterbrook's predictions are no more important than the rest, but they are allowed to exist and be discussed despite your objections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps it is/was insensitive to hammer home Canada's Kyoto FAIL, but it is true and confirmed by treaty withdraw when faced with the obvious sanctions for non-compliance. You can thank PM Harper instead of criticizing him. If "troll" be your oft repeated label for any member who dares to challenge your climate change dogma and rhetoric, then I wear it with pride.

again, your brazen contradiction... and hypocrisy... surfaces. As you've done repeatedly in the past, you've spoken "fondly" of the Harper Conservative actions toward Kyoto... of course, at the same time, you rail against the, as you label it, "Canada Kyoto FAIL". :lol: That sir, that... is trolling!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is now the second time you've stated as such - what post was, as you say, "edited away"? Put up or...

A pity....I thought for just a moment that honour could be found even amongst alarmists. The post existed....others saw it I'm sure...and it was your prerogative to edit it away, just like any other member. Don't be a...wait for it....DENIER !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easterbrook's predictions are no more important than the rest, but they are allowed to exist and be discussed despite your objections.

then discuss them! You've been challenged: "What's the projection based on? What assumptions does he make? Since he doesn't accept that greenhouse gases have an affect on global temperature, what physics/physical-science foundations is he relying upon?". Please, as you say... DISCUSS!!! :lol: Is there a problem?

"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

again, your brazen contradiction... and hypocrisy... surfaces. As you've done repeatedly in the past, you've spoken "fondly" of the Harper Conservative actions toward Kyoto... of course, at the same time, you rail against the, as you label it, "Canada Kyoto FAIL". :lol: That sir, that... is trolling!

Kyoto FAILED in Canada long before Harper arrived as minority or majority government. Denying this is....delusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A pity....I thought for just a moment that honour could be found even amongst alarmists. The post existed....others saw it I'm sure...and it was your prerogative to edit it away, just like any other member. Don't be a...wait for it....DENIER !

BS. Surely you must remember the thread? What post was, as you claim, "edited away"... let's see the post/the MLW injected edit declaration. Which post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

citation request.

You've been shown plenty of it. There quite a bit in this thread alone. Try reading what you've already been shown instead of arguing blindly, and trying to deflect by sending people off to collect more links you won't even read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then discuss them! You've been challenged: "What's the projection based on? What assumptions does he make? Since he doesn't accept that greenhouse gases have an affect on global temperature, what physics/physical-science foundations is he relying upon?". Please, as you say... DISCUSS!!! :lol: Is there a problem?

"

Nope...I provided the link to Easterbrook's web site. It's American (of course), so you should be use to using such archives and resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kyoto FAILED in Canada long before Harper arrived as minority or majority government. Denying this is....delusion.

no - no it didn't. You've been provided with a somewhat exhaustive accounting of the direct actions taken by the Liberal government, the planning/intentions that were displaced by the change in government, the direct obstructionism of the Harper Opposition (while holding the minority government at ransom)... and the actions that were stopped/countered by the new government. The post is a short MLW search away. Your call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've been shown plenty of it. There quite a bit in this thread alone. Try reading what you've already been shown instead of arguing blindly, and trying to deflect by sending people off to collect more links you won't even read.

I accept your refusal to respond to a direct challenge to have you substantiate your claim(s) - carry on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no - no it didn't. You've been provided with a somewhat exhaustive accounting of the direct actions taken by the Liberal government, the planning/intentions that were displaced by the change in government, the direct obstructionism of the Harper Opposition (while holding the minority government at ransom)... and the actions that were stopped/countered by the new government. The post is a short MLW search away. Your call.

I care not about the cute internecine warfare in your nation....the collective response and ultimate Kyoto FAIL is/was Canada's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope...I provided the link to Easterbrook's web site. It's American (of course), so you should be use to using such archives and resources.

nice one!!! I've re-quoted your post below, including the edit notification... this was the original denier blogger site page you linked to: http://www.appinsys.com/globalwarming/GW_TemperatureProjections.htm --- that particular page "looks" a little innocuous... head to the home page and try out a few links to appreciate the "breadth of denial"!

of course, you got your own link edit wrong - "Error 404 - object not found"... but wait! It gets even better: you got your revised link from your original link (the one you presumed to edit out)!!! The revised link you edited in doesn't even exist on Easterbrook's own site - has he been so shamed to the point of pulling it down himself? :lol: Oh... tooooo easy - thanks for the freebee!!!

.

Don Easterbrook waded into the deep end years ago:

Don Easterbrook (geologist at Western Washington University) made predictions in 2001 as to the future global (and northern hemisphere) temperatures to the year 2100.

In 2001, I put my reputation on the line and published my predictions for entering a global cooling cycle about 2007 (plus or minus 3-5 years), based on past glacial, ice core, and other data. As right now, my prediction seems to be right on target and what we would expect from the past climatic record, but the IPCC prediction is getting farther and farther off the mark. With the apparent solar cooling cycle upon us, we have a ready explanation for global warming and cooling. If the present cooling trend continues, the IPCC reports will have been the biggest farce in the history of science.” [http://myweb.wwu.edu/dbunny/research/global/glocool_summary.pdf]

Edited by bush_cheney2004, Today, 11:30 AM.

but again, even if it existed, your blindly cut/pasted a quote/graph... without any of your own personal interpretation. If you do find an actual working link, these same following questions/challenges remain for you to respond to... since, as you say, "DISCUSS"! Again - let's discuss: "What's the projection based on? What assumptions does he make? Since he doesn't accept that greenhouse gases have an affect on global temperature, what physics/physical-science foundations is he relying upon?".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I care not about the cute internecine warfare in your nation....the collective response and ultimate Kyoto FAIL is/was Canada's.

ya ya, now... now, you don't care about it. Interesting! When your related contradiction and hypocrisy is pointed out, all of a sudden, as you say, "I care not"! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ya ya, now... now, you don't care about it. Interesting! When your related contradiction and hypocrisy is pointed out, all of a sudden, as you say, "I care not"! :lol:

Attempts to divert Canada's Kyoto FAIL to partisan politics is your affair, not mine. Wear it well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but again, even if it existed, your blindly cut/pasted a quote/graph... without any of your own personal interpretation. If you do find an actual working link, these same following questions/challenges remain for you to respond to... since, as you say, "DISCUSS"! Again - let's discuss: "What's the projection based on? What assumptions does he make? Since he doesn't accept that greenhouse gases have an affect on global temperature, what physics/physical-science foundations is he relying upon?".

They are based on whatever Easterbrook chose to use. Why do you still feel threatened by his "discredited" views ? You seem to have no difficulty using other government resources and opinions from the "denier nation". This dichotomy remains unanswered, but that's OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are based on whatever Easterbrook chose to use. Why do you still feel threatened by his "discredited" views ? You seem to have no difficulty using other government resources and opinions from the "denier nation". This dichotomy remains unanswered, but that's OK.

just say you don't know the basis... you also probably don't care! Just say you can't provide your own interpretation of what you're presenting... just say you haven't a clue about anything you reference/link to. Revel in your blind links and your cut&paste parroting. As you've shown across multiple MLW threads, you simply throw down links/quotes from denier blogs without any accompanying verbiage of your own... you make no attempt to interpret anything or to provide any semblance of what your links presume to offer/state. You actually believe you're contributing! :lol: I most certainly don't, as you say, feel threatened, by any of the nonsense you trot out. Do you drop those parroted debunked/refuted gems of yours, expecting no response?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Attempts to divert Canada's Kyoto FAIL to partisan politics is your affair, not mine. Wear it well.

no - again, you want it both ways. Your contradiction and hypocrisy runs rampant here! You repeatedly lambaste the Kyoto treaty... you repeatedly positively tout the Harper Conservatives for ignoring the treaty (from 2006 on) and for formally removing Canada from the treaty (in 2010)... all the while you throw out your nattering "Canada's Kyoto FAIL" refrain. Make up your mind! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is a geologist that makes a correct prediction considered a failure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept your refusal to respond to a direct challenge to have you substantiate your claim(s) - carry on!

I accept your refusal to acknowledge a direct response to your repeated dodging of the basic facts repeatedly presented to you. Go back to your rabbit hole!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept your refusal to acknowledge a direct response to your repeated dodging of the basic facts repeatedly presented to you. Go back to your rabbit hole!

no - I haven't dodged a thing. You however, you are dodging the multiple citation requests directed at you. You're feverishly dodging! It's quite easy for you to spout off with your unsubstantiated claims... it's another thing to actually provide support to back up your claims, hey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no - again, you want it both ways. Your contradiction and hypocrisy runs rampant here! You repeatedly lambaste the Kyoto treaty... you repeatedly positively tout the Harper Conservatives for ignoring the treaty (from 2006 on) and for formally removing Canada from the treaty (in 2010)... all the while you throw out your nattering "Canada's Kyoto FAIL" refrain. Make up your mind! :lol:

PM Harper likes Canada's Kyoto FAIL...and the money he saved....no inconsistency there. Canada's Kyoto FAIL was pre-ordained by politics and policies before Harper ever took office. Kyoto was your alter to die on....and you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PM Harper likes Canada's Kyoto FAIL...and the money he saved....no inconsistency there.

of course he does! He/his party caused it. Again, the inconsistency/contradiction/hypocrisy... is yours!

other than for your main trolling purpose... and to derail yet another thread with your unrelated Kyoto obsession, what point is there for you to negatively attack Kyoto for it's intent/purpose and then (presume) to chastize/criticize a, as you label it, "Canada Kyoto FAIL"... and doing this all while you talk positively about the actions taken by Harper/his party to derail Canada's participation in the treaty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

other than for your main trolling purpose... and to derail yet another thread with your unrelated Kyoto obsession, what point is there for you to negatively attack Kyoto for it's intent/purpose and then (presume) to chastize/criticize a, as you label it, "Canada Kyoto FAIL"... and doing this all while you talk positively about the actions taken by Harper/his party to derail Canada's participation in the treaty?

It is not my role to provide you comfort and sympathy in the wake of Canada's Kyoto FAIL. Perhaps other like minded alarmists can see you through such a crushing domestic defeat. My own nation saw the folly that was Kyoto early on, and still managed to perform better than Canada for GHG emissions growth.

All the more reason to step back from the climate change dogma, nefarious political goals for wealth transfer, carbon credits, and questionable investment in renewables like Big Wind and Big Solar.

If there was a Kyoto FAIL sympathy card available from Target or Walmart, I would buy one for all the brokenhearted alarmists. Then I would send a CONGRATULATIONS card to Prof. Easterbrook !! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...