Welcome to PatsFans.com

Oh My: NIPCC concludes human effect likely small relative to natural variability

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by IcyPatriot, Mar 31, 2014.

  1. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    38,759
    Likes Received:
    415
    Ratings:
    +880 / 6 / -16

    #87 Jersey

    http://heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-IIb/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

    Climate Change Reconsidered

  2. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    38,759
    Likes Received:
    415
    Ratings:
    +880 / 6 / -16

    #87 Jersey

    Re: Oh My: NIPCC concludes human effect likely be small relative to natural variabil

    ...............
  3. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    38,759
    Likes Received:
    415
    Ratings:
    +880 / 6 / -16

    #87 Jersey

    Re: Oh My: NIPCC concludes human effect likely be small relative to natural variabil

    .........................
  4. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,990
    Likes Received:
    188
    Ratings:
    +433 / 5 / -2

    Re: Oh My: NIPCC concludes human effect likely be small relative to natural variabil

    Exxon probably funded them. The weather changed today, so I know they're lying.
  5. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,827
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +184 / 4 / -6

    What else would you expect from a well-known conservative think tank like the Heartland Institute. They reviewed papers by climate change deniers and wrote a report. This is like a report from the Republican Party that says Obamacare is bad.

    The IPCC has 100s of contributing authors and 1000s of reviewers who are volunteers and are required to consider alternative points of view. The Heartland Institute is rumored to pay its authors and gets much of its funding from oil companies in the oil industry and the Koch network.

    At any rate, it's sounding like it's too late to do much about climate change at this point. Might have a response ready when your grandchildren are getting skin cancer or fleeing tsunamis. How about, "Hey, if it wasn't for me, you'd have been paying a carbon tax."
  6. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,406
    Likes Received:
    137
    Ratings:
    +264 / 10 / -26

    The Heartland Institute's major source of funds are the Koch Brothers.. that is all that you need to know..

    This report should be looked at as there are lot of red flags that have implications for our and future generations..
  7. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13

    Can't address the facts attack the source.

    NIPCC - empirical data

    IPCC computer models and politicians. Richard Tol a lead writer for the IPCC resigned due to the way the (political) writers of the summary mangled the attempts to present the science.
  8. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,406
    Likes Received:
    137
    Ratings:
    +264 / 10 / -26

    And you do the same.. the reality is that Heartland is funded by the Koch's and its lead "scientist" is a TV meteorologist who did not even graduate from College..

    Interestingly the article criticizing the IPCC report is authored by a economist employed by Heartland.. he appears to be agenda driven.

    The IPCC had 259 authors from 39 Countries, that reviewed about 55,000 comments during the process and formulation of this report..

    The selection process of the authors are detailed here..

    http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/FS_select_authors.pdf
  9. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,967
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +469 / 6 / -7

    Ha, wow. Come on, Icy.
  10. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    38,759
    Likes Received:
    415
    Ratings:
    +880 / 6 / -16

    #87 Jersey

    Actually Jack I am enjoying this thread ...

    Nobody has ready any of the report but they are attacking it anyways LOL.

    Read the 2nd paragraph in the 1st post ... it says what the study is all about ... LOL.

    Never mind read the link ... they did not even read the post ... LOL

    The report is all about what is or can be good about Co2 increase for the planet.

    Nowhere in the report does it say the planet is not getting warmer ...

    Gotta love it ... maybe now they'll read it ...

    I mean they can still disagree with it but the study was not about warming vs no warming LOL.

    Now they'll say ... Oh i read it ... yeah ... right :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
  11. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,406
    Likes Received:
    137
    Ratings:
    +264 / 10 / -26

    You are aware that the Heartland institute went to great lengths to publish this parody, Non Government Report.....

    Their choice is to resort to humor, and not refute the facts... their lack of the use of science is laughable... instead they revert to engineers, economists, weatherman and agenda driven plutocrats...

    http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf

  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13

    Well the climate has warmed since 1850 and since 1950. This IMO is a good thing and has little if anything to do with human activity.


    The warming predicted by their computer models hasn't occurred where it was predicted to occur. When I have a chance I will post the changing predictions of the IPCC when have been rolled back with each new report when they (IPCC predictions) fail.
  13. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,406
    Likes Received:
    137
    Ratings:
    +264 / 10 / -26

    "IMO" means crap in a scientific world, and shows you complete disregard for the method..

    Changes will be made as more data is received and more peer reviewed scientific studies take place.. that proves nothing.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>