13 votes

I think 97% of Man-Made Climate Change Scientists are Liars and Progresser Democrats are Just Plain Stupid Dupes

It's the Sun Stupid.

Dupe: A person who functions as the tool of another person or power.

Now we know who not to trust with environmental policy. The Climate of the Planet has never been your fault, and probably never will be. You are no longer required to pay for its change or changing it.

Analysis Finds the Sun Explains Climate Change, Not CO2

"From the new SPPI & CO2 Science report:

"There is little need to ascribe a unique cause to late 20th-century global warming (such as elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations), as this latest warming is merely a run-of-the-mill relative warming, sitting atop a solar-induced baseline warming that has been in progress for the past four centuries."

"In considering Qian and Lu's findings, it is important to note that, once again, no help from greenhouse gas emissions was needed to reconstruct the past thousand-year history of Earth's global mean temperature; it was sufficient to merely employ known oscillations in solar radiation variability. And as for the future, the two authors predict that "global-mean temperature will decline to a renewed cooling period in the 2030s, and then rise to a new high-temperature period in the 2060s." Given the cessation in warming observed in the surface and lower tropospheric temperature records over the past decade, it appears their prediction is well on its way to being validated.

Clearly, there is much to recommend the overriding concept that is suggested by the data of these several papers, i.e., that the Sun rules the Earth when it comes to orchestrating major changes in the planet's climate. It is becoming ever more clear that the millennial-scale oscillation of climate that has reverberated throughout the Holocene is indeed the result of similar-scale oscillations in some aspect of solar activity. Consequently, as Mayewski et al. (2004) suggested a decade ago, "significantly more research into the potential role of solar variability is warranted, involving new assessments of potential transmission mechanisms to induce climate change and potential enhancement of natural feedbacks that may amplify the relatively weak forcing related to fluctuations in solar output." We only hope that more scientists will take note and examine the intriguing relations between our nearest star and our planet's temperature.""


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I like that word Dupe. It's

I like that word Dupe. It's disparaging enough.

When do you think they'll

When do you think they'll tell us about this on MSM?

What's really scary is 2012

What's really scary is 2012 and 2013 are the years of Solar Max in this current solar cycle 24. People should be seriously concerned with a cooling planetary climate in the coming next 7 years.

Second Coldest Start To Spring In US History

Food for thought;
The Right Climate Stuff - CPAC 2013 Washington DC March 15 2013 - Tom Wysmuller

Here are many “Peer-Reviewed” articles that should end the

belief that “the debate is over” about global warming. It should also destroy the illusion that there is a “consensus” amongst scientists about the causes of global warming. Those propagating the myth of man-caused global warming are simply distorting reality and the facts…..and that is putting it politely: http://petesplace-peter.blogspot.com/2008/04/peer-reviewed-a...
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical…The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.” – Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”


It is called Agenda 21

It is called Agenda 21 if you want more information


The motivations of global warming high priests scientists are largely pecuniary.

But just be aware, CO2 does have an impact on climate. Everything does in any system. The point is that it's tiny and the feedbacks are antperturbative. I only mention this because if you say it has zero effect you set yourself up for being falsified. It's not zero, but it is tiny and weather counteracts it. See drroyspencer.com for more info.

The ZPAW if it comes will be entirely man made, but it will have nothing to do with climate.

Well, there is one possibility which will have to do with climate. We are overdue for an ice age. The only defense will be ample and optimally dispersed capital stocks, which we do not have. This can only be produced by freedom and free markets. Without free markets capital is concentrated in the political and crony classes and when real climate change occurs, there will be starvation.

We sent the rovers to Mars and the Martian ice caps melt.

Cause and effect; unless correlation is not causation.

Still the government should shut down NASA and sell off the assets to pay the National Debt, Just in case.

Save Mars from Global Warming.

Free includes debt-free!

Mars is having global cooling

Mars is having global cooling now just like the planet Earth.

So much for the Solar Constant.

Last time I looked the martian ice caps were melting.

Confusion is what happens when scientist go bad.

Free includes debt-free!

More Than

1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims Scientists Continue to Debunk Fading “Consensus” in 2008 & 2009 & 2010
(Updates Previous 2009 U.S. Senate Report: “More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims”): https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/400467/original/2010_Sena...
documentary on how a couple of scientists at cern found out that cosmic rays are the major driver of climate and how it took them 10 months to publish the study because of pressure not to by political community: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANMTPF1blpQ
global warming petiton project: 31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs: We urge the United States goverment to reject the global warming agreement that was written in kyoto japan in december 1997 and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the enviroment, hinder the advance of science and technology and damange the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the earths atmosphere and disruption of the earths climate. Moreover there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plants and animal enviroments of the earth: http://www.petitionproject.org/


Global warming or Global Governance

If you were to ask ten people on the street if mankind was causing global warming, at least eight out of ten would say yes. After all, Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth allegedly provides incontrovertible evidence that this is the case. Both presidential candidates are committed to passing economically devastating legislation that will do little to nothing to stop global warming. Contrary to what is heard in the media, however, there is overwhelming evidence that the warming we are experiencing is natural, Nor is there any scientific consensus. 31,000 scientists have signed a petition stating there is “no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide is causing…catastrophic” warming. The debate is still raging within the scientific community. In this DVD, Sovereignty International has put together interviews of respected climate scientists and biologists from numerous sources who explain, step by step, why Al Gore and the global warming alarmists are incorrect. In some cases, blatantly so. The dvd global warming or global governance also provides evidence that the global warming agenda is being funded with tens of billions of dollars as a mechanism to create global governance.Hear from congressmen, experts and even well-known news broadcasters how global governance puts global institutions, especially the United Nations (UN), that are not accountable to the American people in control of every aspect of our economy. The skyrocketing gas and food prices today are a direct result of this agenda: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_u81qXOYfKg


I just thank the Creator

I just thank the Creator who turned down the thermostat of the Sun with the Grand Solar Minimum going on currently and we have global cooling now.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Michael - while I appreciate many of your contributions here

I want to let you know that I changed your headline so it is in accordance with E-prime:

E-Prime (short for English-Prime, sometimes denoted É or E′) is a prescriptive version of the English language that excludes all forms of the verb to be. E-Prime does not allow the conjugations of to be—be, am, is, are, was, were, been, being— the archaic forms of to be (e.g. art, wast, wert), or the contractions of to be—'s, 'm, 're (e.g. I'm, he's, she's, they're).
Some scholars advocate using E-Prime as a device to clarify thinking and strengthen writing.[1] For example, the sentence "the film was good" could not be expressed under the rules of E-Prime, and the speaker might instead say "I liked the film" or "the film made me laugh". The E-Prime versions communicate the speaker's experience rather than judgment, making it harder for the writer or reader to confuse opinion with fact.

So rather than your offensive declarative statement of opinion, I replaced it with the prefix, "I think..." and then your offensive statement.

More on E-Prime


He's the man.

Wow! But ambiguity is the nature of language.

Michael, has Pinker weighed in on this?

English can be used to admit something yet provide plausible deniability in a crowd. Especially in a hostile crowd. Meaning is conveyed to friendlies and not to hostiles.

The word 'religion' has ambiguous roots. Perhaps an indication of a need felt for ambiguity. Religions and government are hostile and friendly entities.

One theory is that lig is akin to ligament; something that ties or binds.

Religion re-ties beings to their past; their physiology, psychology and history. Questions of origin, process, intent and will are meaningful.

Another theory is that lig is a declination of the verb legere (lecture)

Now religion can be scorned by focusing on the banality of lecturing again and again ad nauseum. The secret joke is told in the open.

"To live or to die,
I ask myself this."

My first reaction was scorn as I read the wiki.

Hah! I thought; English for autistics.

Although in contracts it could have utility. To be voluntary a contract lacking ambiguity would benefit both parties.

However, I can see that journalism benefits from a lack of ambiguity.

"I am, who I shall prove to be." This was God's answer to Moses when Moses wanted a name to blame for these commandments when he showed them to the crowd. Was God saying, Hey Moses, stand on your own two feet. People will know you by your fruits.

Still it feels to me at first blush like the difference between driving the roads and taking a skilift or following a track.

Maybe I should try to color in the lines. I suspect Samuel Clemens would rebel.

This is food for thought. I will withhold judgement. This deserve some consideration.

To be continued...

Free includes debt-free!

I've noticed some of my

I've noticed some of my headlines have been changed in the past and posts altered for front page DP view. I am very comfortable with this policy and feel free to do it any time or delete anything that may be deemed offensive posted by me. I feel no need to question your judgment Michael or that of your moderators.

I'm just trying to help with content and raising eyebrows with what I can get away with, within reason. My past ten years of blogging have taught me the boundaries and I find Alex Jones and others repeating what I have written from time to time, and they are perfectly welcome to do so.

"So rather than your

"So rather than your offensive declarative statement of opinion, I replaced it with the prefix, "I think..." and then your offensive statement"


If you're going to call

If you're going to call people so many names at least do you ACD work properly.

Check out this

Figure 1: Global temperature (red, NASA GISS) and Total solar irradiance (blue, 1880 to 1978 from Solanki, 1979 to 2009 from PMOD).

figure on this


Web page.

For further information read the comments section. Solar activity and temperature DID correlate pretty closely but only until the 1980s which deniers always seem to leave out.

There are legitimate questions to be asked such as climate sensitivity, financial viability and ultimate effect of any attempt to reduce greenhouse emissions but this is not one of them.

How do you account for the

How do you account for the increase in total dead bodybag count from people freezing to death due to freezing planetary temperatures in the past 7 years worldwide? This past year has been especially brutal.

Monumentally stupid

Monumentally stupid argument.

Assuming global cooling is going on, just how much do you think temperature has dropped? A few 10ths of a degree? You really think that is likely to lead to more deaths or could it be increased poverty due to (speculating) the global economic crisis.

Do you find the NASA graph I've linked acceptable? If yes, then clearly there is no global cooling, if no, then why? Gubmint conspiracy?

People with vested interests

People with vested interests keep releasing lies.
This from the Met Office where they had to admit the truth.

Report: Global warming stopped 16 years ago

A report in the UK Daily Mail reveals a Met Office report quietly released… and here is the chart to prove it:


Update on Solar Cycle 24 – Hathaway’s latest predictions show smallest sunspot cycle since 1906

Ok, here is a test, do you

Ok, here is a test, do you know why the two datasets are so different?

One is land based and the

One is land based and the others are ocean based and space based.

The land based weather station locations were cut sharply many years ago and manipulation to show warmer temperatures have been pervasive.

Sydney’s historic weather station: 150 meters makes all the difference

Awww Now ain't that CUTE...=)

Awww Now ain't that CUTE...=) ...but its WRONG!

You clearly haven't done more than a cursory perusal so I'll end this discussion till you have read about methodologies used to determine temperature trends.

Hint: Read the met department's response to the link you posted.

Land is only 25% of the

HadCRUT, GISS, don't bore me.

Land is only 25% of the planet and the sparse heat island effects has little influence on the other 75% covered by water.



Useful Idiots is also a name

Useful Idiots is also a name that comes to mind for Progressers.

While I'd agree that many of the

rank and file progressive Democrats are "stupid dupes," the leadership are far from it. They are sophisticated manipulators who "never let a crisis go to waste."

Dupe: A person who functions

Dupe: A person who functions as the tool of another person or power.

fireant's picture

Man-made Global Warming is nothing but leverage to separate us..

from our rightful heritage as top of the pecking order and stewards of the earth. Proponents want us to feel guilty, that we do not belong here, and the animals are somehow superior, all of which contradicts biblical essence. This automatically cedes control of our very existence to those same proponents. It's philosophical roots can be found here: http://www.dailypaul.com/280382/the-best-documentary-i-have-...
Conversely, stewardship demands treating our home with economy and cleanliness as a consideration for the future. No one can argue our waters are cleaner than the 60's and 70's, nor that the air is cleaner than just a few decades ago. Regardless of motivation, we have made progress.

Undo what Wilson did