1 - 4
In response to:

Climate Change and the Perils of Inaction

KungFuSV Wrote: Feb 27, 2014 11:03 PM
(continued 3/3) It is the height of irresponsibility to be basing policies that incur US$TRILLIONS across the world (in the form of taxes) upon something that is so tenuous as those "climate models" that have been roundly debunked! Remember ClimateGate's leaked sets of internal eMails? What did those tell us? That pro-AGW so-called climate "scientists" weren't beyond manipulating their data/results to toe the pro-AGW agenda worldwide? Is this all part of the Agenda 21 efforts from the U.N. to basically control everyone's lives everywhere across the world?
In response to:

Climate Change and the Perils of Inaction

KungFuSV Wrote: Feb 27, 2014 10:53 PM
So how accurate have these agencies' predictions been for this winter? They predictably toed the AGW agenda and told us that we would be in for a warmer than normal winter here in the USA ... and what do we have? Swimming, anyone? The accuracy of their predictions this winter has been -22 out of -50! This gives me great confidence in their ability to accurately project out decades into the future, right? But WHY have these predictions been so inaccurate? There are many reasons and the idea of modeling our atmosphere is complex beyond comprehension at this point in our understanding of all the atmospheric dynamics, but one key factor seems to stand out -- do you feel cooler at night than during the day? Why is that? Because the SUN isn't visible at night? Oh! So the SUN might be influencing our atmospheric dynamics (including temperature)? So why is it that practically all of the legacy IPCC-endorsed models traditionally IGNORE the effects of the SUN upon our atmospheric dynamics? Does this make any sense? And if these models were developed with true scientific intent in mind, WHY was it that, when some true scientists tested these models by injecting pseudo-random inputs, the SAME trending outputs were returned? WHY is there ALWAYS that "hockey stick" upswing in recent times -- regardless of what the inputs were? Does this look like the results were just a wee-bit "spiked" ahead of time to further some nefarious agenda rather than reflect actual reality? So what do we have, now? What's this thing about imposing more taxes upon our "carbon footprints" to mitigate this mythical CO2 impact upon our climate? Isn't it just a wee-bit curious that CO2 was picked to be the culprit in all of this AGW madness? WHY is that? Could it have something to do with trying to place blame upon mankind for industrializing? This Cap-and-Tax regime that is being coerced upon our public is nothing more than a massive wealth redistribution scheme that will accomplish exactly NOTHING to mitigate ANYTHING that affects our climate! Along with Obamacare, these two programs comprise the BIGGEST wealth redistribution scheme that this world has ever seen! Don't believe me? What did the co-founder of Greenpeace (Dr. Patrick Moore) just testify to in Congress on February 25, 2014? Read his transcript! Dr. Moore understands what's going on! It's time the rest of our public gets the CORRECT education about this whole political SCAM that is being perpetrated upon all of humanity!
In response to:

Climate Change and the Perils of Inaction

KungFuSV Wrote: Feb 27, 2014 10:23 PM
Steve, Your article is SO FULL OF PROPAGANDA and DECEIT that I had to debate whether to WASTE MY TIME commenting at all ... but I guess the battle against this whole AGW MYTH must go on ... Firstly, exactly WHERE do you get the LIE that CO2 is the culprit behind climate changes (whether warming or cooling)? Do you even understand that CO2 is NOT the most prevalent so-called "Greenhouse Gas"? Do you even know what the most prevalent Greenhouse Gas is? Look up at the sky above ... what do you often see that is puffy white? What is that? Clouds? What are clouds made of? Water vapor? And what is water vapor made of? H2O! Now ... do you feel a distinct difference in the atmospheric temperature when it's cloudy vs. sunny? Well ... guess what? That's a temperature difference that might span multiple degrees C and you can feel its impacts over the course of a few hours rather than decades! What is the purported "reduction" in temperature over decades IF the world were to institute AGW carbon taxes? Something like 0.1 deg C over 50 years? So let's see ... atmospheric temperatures are overshadowed by H2O over CO2 within hours by 1-2 orders of magnitude and this happens day in and day out ... don't even try to justify that you are talking about a long-term trend over decades because you KNOW that clouds will ALWAYS be present and will ALWAYS overshadow whatever influence CO2 might have ... you might say that whatever "impacts" CO2 has can be relegated to ROUND-OFF ERRORS in this regime! Now ... let's next look at HOW these AGW wackos come up with their purportedly "learned" predictions ... everything they've done is based on computer models ... as someone who has developed complex models for complex systems in my past professions, let me just tell you that such models are only as good (valid) as the underlying premises upon which they are built ... in other words -- Garbage In ==> Garbage Out ... so how have these climate models fared? Let's see ... before we can run, we should presumably learn how to walk, right? So it should make sense that accurate WEATHER predictions should precede CLIMATE predictions since climate is an aggregation of weather behavior over a (long) period of time ... so how are we doing in the weather prediction arena? The NOAA and its counterpart agency in the UK have a measurement index for this and it spans values from -50 to +100 (where +100 is total accuracy and -50 is having squirrels throw acorns up in the air) ... (continued)
In response to:

Cruz Aims at His Own Side -- Again

KungFuSV Wrote: Feb 22, 2014 4:34 AM
Mona, Why is Ted Cruz (and other TEA Party-aligned members) critical for the future of the GOP? Because the establishment GOP candidates have a long-standing track record of losing key national/state/local elections against Progressive candidates, who are routinely more effective at brainwashing the public with Progressive views than the establishment GOP has been able to counter! But notice what the filibustering by Ted Cruz and Rand Paul accomplished -- *coerced* national media exposure for *our* causes! So we *now* have *vindication* for Ted Cruz with the Obamacare fiasco that *proves* his absolutely accurate foresight and principles! However, the problem we've had with public perceptions of the "shutdown" is how the establishment GOP just wasn't willing/able to get *our* conservative justifications out into the public psyche and, instead, let those Progressives control that process with their massive brainwashing about the GOP being responsible for the "shutdown," when it was Obama and Reid who were the *true* obstructionists! The GOP can *not* win any messaging wars against Progressives if it doesn't even *try* to fight back against their incessant *lies* against *our* causes! Until the establishment GOP can overcome these two serious deficiencies in fielding appealing candidates and leveraging mass media messaging, you can try to hit your opponents as forcefully as you want, but it will *still* result in an epic *fail* at the polls! There is a saying -- "insanity is repeating the same mistakes over and over again and expecting different results" ... so are you advocating that the GOP maintain it's legacy strategy of "insanity" going forward?
1 - 4