General Debate 5 January 2013

January 5th, 2013 at 8:00 am by Kokila Patel
Tags:

76 Responses to “General Debate 5 January 2013”

  1. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    1st

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. SGA (1,017 comments) says:

    Chris Martin (36) moves past Glen McGrath (35), only Courtney Walsh has more (43). Does he have enough matches left in his career to make it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    The Wall Street Journal – Editorial – Kyoto Scorecard

    The Kyoto Protocol on climate change used to be a big deal. So big that the future of humanity was said to hinge on its implementation. Did you know it expired on New Year’s Day? We’re guessing you didn’t, but don’t worry. It’s no big deal.

    Adopted in 1997 and in force since 2005, the U.N. compact was intended to lock in its signatories into curbing or cutting their greenhouse-gas emissions relative to 1990 levels. It didn’t work out as planned.

    Japan promised a 6% reduction relative to its 1990 levels, but instead saw a 7.4% increase, despite 20 years of economic stagnation. Australia, where growth has been more robust, pledged to let carbon increase by no more than 8%. Instead its 1990-2010 emissions rose 47.5%.
    :::
    In its day, the Kyoto Protocol did its share of economic damage by distorting energy markets and encouraging job-killing legislation. Some of that damage will remain. Still, count this as another eco-cure that arrived with a bang and departed, as so many of them do, with a whimper.

    Not so sure about the whimper bit. The truly deceived continue to worship at the altar of guilt, while the truly deceitful continue to worship at the altar of greed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    Warmest Year on Record for the usa

    Spring, March, July, and the annual temperature were all warmest on record in the contiguous U.S. July was the warmest month of any month in the 1,400+ months of the U.S. data record, going back to 1895. The spring temperature departure from average was the largest on record for any season, and March temperatures had the second largest warm departure from average of any month in U.S. history. All-time hottest temperature records were set over approximately 7% of the area of the contiguous U.S., according to a database of 298 major U.S. cities maintained by wunderground’s weather historian, Christopher C. Burt. Given the very warm December temperatures so far, the final 2012 annual temperature is likely to break the previous warmest year on record (1998) by at least 0.7°F–a colossal margin to break an annual record by. It is likely that 15 states will end up with their warmest year on record in 2012, and 42 states will have a top-ten warmest year.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Keeping Stock (10,337 comments) says:

    Here’s hoping the parasitic “tourism operator” who ripped off tourists AND the Auckland City Mission is found, named, samed and sent packing…

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/screwing-tourist-industry.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Keeping Stock (10,337 comments) says:

    Make that “found, named, shamed and sent packing…”

    Note to self; read before hitting the Submit Comment button, not after :D

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Griff – you’re describing weather, not climate. Open your eyes. You’ve been deceived.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    yes KK just because the temperatures are going up does not mean its warming :lol:

    If it keeps getting warmer by the year it will soon be another ice age.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Here is one of Griffs “climate scientists” and fellow doomsday cultists.

    Death threats anyone? Austrian Prof: global warming deniers should be sentenced to death

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/12/death-threats-anyone-austrian-prof-global-warming-deniers-should-be-sentenced-to-death/

    I wonder about the career prospects of any “climate scientist” who questions the dire predictions made. This is typical of the fanatical approach taken by the cult. It is hardly a climate for conducting good science.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Griff (3,696) Says:
    January 5th, 2013 at 8:45 am
    Warmest Year on Record for the usa

    Really ? Well that should make a pleasant change.

    A brutal and historical cold snap has so far caused 80 deaths in South America, according to international news agencies. Temperatures have been much below normal for over a week in vast areas of the continent. In Chile, the Aysen region was affected early last week by the worst snowstorm in 30 years. The snow accumulation reached 5 feet in Balmaceda and the Army was called to rescue people trapped by the snow.

    Europe struggles under record cold snap

    BELGRADE, Serbia (AP) — Overwhelmed by deep snow and harsh temperatures, some countries in Europe closed down schools and struggled to continue public transport and garbage pick-up Monday, as post-snow rains caused a dam to collapse in Bulgaria, flooding a village and killing at least four…Europeans across the continent were digging out from heavy snow after a week of bitter cold in which the number of dead — most of them homeless — continued to rise by the day. Temperatures have fallen as low as minus 33 Fahrenheit (minus 36 Celsius) in Ukraine, the hardest-hit country.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    richard Parncutt, Professor of Systematic Musicology, University of Graz, Austria,

    The study of musicology makes you a climate scientist well I never!!

    No wonder you are so informed kea reading joe nova makes you a expert…. eh….

    Still waiting for you to expand on the great global warming conspiwhacky
    Did all the beakers go to the arctic to have a great time melting the ice with their Bunsen burners this year
    must have been some party

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. MT_Tinman (3,183 comments) says:

    Here’s hoping the parasitic “christians” who would seek to deny tourists the chance to meet and commune with lesser privileged NZers look to themselves first.

    I do hope that the City Mission asked for a donation but have no doubt both the tourists and those they met during the day were better off for their meal together.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    I have explained it many times Griff. It is about money and power. It is really quite simple. There are many good articles you can access on the internet. Go and have a read, we promise not to tell the other cult members.

    Anyway, do you agree that deniers should be killed, Griff ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Oh & Griff, maybe the Proffessor wanted to tap into the multi trillion dollar AGW industry. He could come up with some research proposal – How climate change effects the propagation of sound waves in violins- or some other bullshit.

    There is massive money to be made, though sadly real science continues to struggle for funding.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Reid (16,440 comments) says:

    Isn’t this pathetic. $1.4 billion for ruining the Gulf of Mexico forever. Tell me again, how much did the bankers get off the taxpayer for ruining the economy? One law for all? Yeah right.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/01/03/bp-praises-transocean-settlement-fingers-halliburton/

    Here’s hoping the parasitic “christians” who would seek to deny tourists the chance to meet and commune with lesser privileged NZers look to themselves first.

    What a warped and twisted tiny little mind you have MT.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Griff displaying his climate ignorance again.

    1. It is not the warmest year on record in the USA. There are millions and millions of years where the temperature was higher.

    2. There have been dozens and dozens of years with the highest temperature in the instrumental record. All of them have signified nothing in terms of impending doom.

    3. It has to be either going up or going down. At any point in man’s or nature’s history, there is a 50% that temperatures are increasing or decreasing. Yours is an utterly non-compelling observation.

    4. If you go through the instrumental record, a statement such as ‘7 out of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred in the last decade’ have been true for about 30% of any of the years you could chose.

    5. Almost all current life on Earth has existed through higher temperatures than today. The Eemian Interglacial was 3 to 4 degrees warmer and sea levels were 8-10 metres higher. Warmer temperatures are more likely to be a boon than anything else.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    Fill in with detail kea not just your usual empty opinions

    As to reading the internet…… I do
    Unlike you i prefer to get science from real scientific organizations not blogs funded by the carbon industry

    Its called applying critical thinking and evaluating the source of your information.

    Your use of the word cult is rather inappropriate don’t you think. Seeing as the entire scientific community except for a few nutters sopport my view
    I guess that means I am a member of the cult of science
    That makes you a member of the cult of non science IE nutter

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Seeing as the entire scientific community except for a few nutters sopport my view
    I guess that means I am a member of the cult of science

    Another failure of understanding by Griff.

    The opinions of scientists is not science. The data they produce is. If the data and the opinions do not match, the data is science, the opinions are non-science.

    Therefore you are a follower of non-science Griff.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Unlike you i prefer to get science from real scientific organizations not blogs funded by the carbon industry

    Its called applying critical thinking and evaluating the source of your information.

    Remind us who funds these “real scientific organizations” Griff ? ( You keep avoiding this simple question ! )

    What would happen to those funds, should they discover the theory is flawed ?

    This is a blog and it is about “opinions”. I am not impressed by links and quotes supporting a particular point of view. You & I both know we can find articles supporting anything, on the net. For many people it is a Cult. They are not motivated by concern for the climate, but political/social issues and puritan enviromentalism. Those people have a fanaticism you do not see in the sceptics.

    And Griff, do try and be civil, this early in the year :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Keeping Stock (10,337 comments) says:

    MT_Tinman said

    I do hope that the City Mission asked for a donation but have no doubt both the tourists and those they met during the day were better off for their meal together.

    I’m sure they were, but the “tourism operator” promised them a grand Christmas buffet, and told them it was paid for and put on by the New Zealand Government.

    Whilst there’s an element of caveat emptor the “tourism operator” who took their bucks in exchange for a range of experiences that cost nothing sounds like an especially dodgy character. I’m sure you as much as anyone appreciate a good flow of tourists who won’t go back and bad-mouth New Zealand because of rip-off merchants and parasites.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Sonny, the cult is based on computer models, not observation. If the data does not match, they simply change the “model”, but not in a way that predicts a different outcome.

    In real science, if a theory does not accurately predict an outcome, then the theory is questioned. They can not afford to do that with AGW, as questioning the theory would result in all that research funding drying up. AGW is a huge global industry worth trillion of dollars. They are not going to let go of all that money and power, without a fight.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Left Right and Centre (2,973 comments) says:

    I’ve got a question about the weird lumpy goop in my last coffee two days ago….

    Two cups in a row… lots of instant coffee granules combined with on it’s used by date extra slim milk and lots of sugar….

    You wouldn’t believe the giant lump it made in the cup… golf ball volume but shape was tablet and formed at the bottom of ordinary ceramic cup…

    I was gobsmacked!! WTF is that shit? If marshmallow and toffee had a really ugly mutant child… it would look like this thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Reid (16,440 comments) says:

    The Third Force.

    In order to understand what this THIRD FORCE is and how it works, as well as how it can be effectively stopped cold, it is essential to examine the British Empire, how it evolved and how it was stopped cold in its pursuit of tyranny in the American Colonies during the Revolutionary War. It has been trying ever since to re-assert itself and resume its strategy to fully impose a complete tyranny in America through its control over our monetary production and distribution system and only now is it starting to makes it last, big move before the THIRD FORCE is finished with it and discharges it to junk pile of history. The British Empire is the contemporary poster child for the THIRD FORCE, but it’s hidden hand probably has also controlled Bolshevik Russia, Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, Maoist China, ancient Rome, Greece, and Egypt under the Pharaohs and many other ancient nations. It appears that once this parasite has extracted all their lifeblood of a nation state and destroyed it, it then moves on and selects a new host in its ever widening quest to build a NWO Globalist one-world tyranny, which some have called the “plan of the ages” or “the plan of the ancients”.

    Not that most of you will get it. But one or two might.

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/03/the-third-force/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Longknives (4,737 comments) says:

    Well I must say I am feeling smug after predicting on Kiwiblog that South Africa would beat NZ inside three days (This was last week when people were beating their chests and talking the Black Caps up after one flukey ‘Hit and Giggle’ T20 win)

    Move aside Nostradamus!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Redbaiter (8,787 comments) says:

    “ruining the Gulf of Mexico forever.”

    One day Reid you’ll write something that isn’t wildly inaccurate hyperbole.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. kowtow (8,428 comments) says:

    Alaska’s in the USA innit?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2256188/What-global-warming-Alaska-headed-ice-age-scientists-report-states-steady-temperature-decline.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    You talk the most unmitigated Shiite Kea

    AGW is based on sound science

    The existence of the greenhouse effect was argued for by Joseph Fourier in 1824. The argument and the evidence were further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838, and reasoned from experimental observations by John Tyndall in 1859, and more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896

    If an ideal thermally conductive blackbody was the same distance from the Sun as the Earth is, it would have a temperature of about 5.3 °C. However, since the Earth reflects about 30% of the incoming sunlight, this idealized planet’s effective temperature (the temperature of a blackbody that would emit the same amount of radiation) would be about −18 °C. The surface temperature of this hypothetical planet is 33 °C below Earth’s actual surface temperature of approximately 14 °C.The mechanism that produces this difference between the actual surface temperature and the effective temperature is due to the atmosphere and is known as the greenhouse effect

    By their percentage contribution to the greenhouse effect on Earth the four major gases are
    water vapor, 36–70%
    carbon dioxide, 9–26%
    methane, 4–9%
    ozone, 3–7%

    The effect of combustion-produced carbon dioxide on the global climate, a special case of the greenhouse effect first described in 1896 by Svante Arrhenius, has also been called the Callendar effect.

    We have changed the composition of the atmosphere

    Measurements of CO2 from the Mauna Loa observatory show that concentrations have increased from about 313 ppm in 1960 to about 389 ppm in 2010.

    The current observed amount of CO2 exceeds the geological record maxima (~300 ppm) from ice core data.
    Over the past 800,000 years, ice core data shows that carbon dioxide has varied from values as low as 180 ppm to the pre-industrial level of 270ppm.

    These things are not models kea

    Models are how we try to project the future from the known effect in the past.

    How else should we do this chicken entrails? :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “ruining the Gulf of Mexico forever.”

    lmao. WTF?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. calendar girl (1,232 comments) says:

    GD thread stuffed again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Fletch (6,359 comments) says:

    LR&C’s comment from 2am and my response –

    Left Right and Centre (159) Says:
    January 5th, 2013 at 2:02 am

    Lots of people reckon that religion is superstitious bullshit Fletch…. and if it is… that makes everything you type a waste of space.

    It’s funny how religious sheep have to start off with a specific fixed conclusion and then try to make everything else fit in around it.

    That is just pathetic childish reasoning…. save it for your fucking fairytale book reading evenings pal. Two things wrong with religious sheep…. they believe fairytales and then try to convert people into fairytale believing morons like they are. They’re like a fucking disease that keeps trying to spread from host to host.

    Yeah.. it’s a lifestyle choice. Like believing made-up fairytales?

    LR&C, except that Western culture and ethics were pretty much built on that “fairy-tale” book as you put it. And the result? The best and most compassionate society there ever was. Try building that same society off the Koran or Mao’s Little Red Book or Lenins’ The Communist Manifesto and, well, the results speak for themselves.

    You may argue with me, but history proves you wrong.

    I know people who are not Catholic who still send their children to Catholic school; in fact, there was an article in The Listener or North and South (I can’t remember which now), reporting on the upswing of non-religious parents lining up to get their children in to religious schools. Perhaps it’s because even though they do not totally agree with the Bible, they understand that their children are being taught the good ethics and morals that the Bible and Jesus teach.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Griff (3,699) Says:
    January 5th, 2013 at 10:46 am
    You talk the most unmitigated Shiite Kea

    AGW is based on sound science

    The existence of the greenhouse effect was argued for by Joseph Fourier in 1824. The argument and the evidence were further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838, and reasoned from experimental observations by John Tyndall in 1859, and more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896

    These points have nothing to do with Global Warming.

    You lack a basic understanding of the issues.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Fletch (6,359 comments) says:

    I see that in the U.S, the feds are phasing out incandescent light bulbs, like Helen tried to do here. A new study has just come out over there showing that the CFL’s emit harmful UV rays that can damage cells.

    Money saving, compact fluorescent light bulbs emit high levels of ultra violet radiation, according to a new study. Research at Long Island’s Stony Brook found that the bulbs emit rays so strong that they can actually burn skin and skin cells.

    “The results were that you could actually initiate cell death,” said Marcia Simon, a Professor of Dermatology.

    Exposure to the bulbs could lead to premature aging and skin cancer, according to doctors.

    “It can also cause skin cancer in the deadliest for, and that’s melanoma,” said Dr. Rebecca Tung.

    In every bulb that researchers tested they found that the protective coating around the light creating ‘phosphor’ was cracked, allowing dangerous ultraviolet rays to escape.

    Homeowners expressed concern over the effect that the bulbs could have on children.

    http://commcgi.cc.stonybrook.edu/am2/publish/General_University_News_2/SBU_Study_Reveals_Harmful_Effects_of_CFL_Bulbs_to_Skin.shtml

    I am slowly replacing all the CFL bulbs at my parents home with halogen which also saves 30%. eg, a 42W bulb puts out the equivalent of 60W of light. Most supermarkets have the Philips Eco-Classic brand halogen.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    Get with the modern world fletch

    LED

    A nine watt led puts out the same as a sixty incandescent

    They last 50,000 hours not the 1,000 of halogen

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Fletch (6,359 comments) says:

    Griff, sounds good. I don’t think I’ve seen those ones.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Fletch (6,359 comments) says:

    I see though, that Amazon is selling the new prize-winning Philips bulb that is supposed to last for 22 years!

    When the US government held a contest aimed at creating the future of lightbulbs, Philips won with their L-Prize series.

     These bulbs are rated to last 22.8 years, which is so long you’ll probably lose them before they have a chance to burn out.  But if you manage to keep them throughout their lifetime, each bulb can save you hundreds in energy costs.
    Not only do the bulbs last a long time, they’re also much safer.  

    They don’t contain any mercury and generate less heat than a regular lightbulb.  Basically, these bulbs are better for you all around.  That said, they’re an investment.  Normal lightbulbs won’t last nearly as long but they’ll cost you less up front.  Because the L-Prize bulbs are so new and efficient, they’re about $37 each.  

    That said, if you’ve got a home and aren’t planning on going anywhere, you could effectively outfit the house with them, have and raise children, and still have a few years left before you need to purchase replacements.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    LED fletch

    Hold off the investment for five years and the price will drop to around 10US each

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Viking2 (11,467 comments) says:

    Given that current light bulbs are abot a $1.00 and last 2 months it won’t tke long to pay for the new ones.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Unlike you i prefer to get science from real scientific organizations not blogs funded by the carbon industry

    Griff, I am still waiting for an answer: Remind us who funds these “real scientific organizations” Griff ? ( You keep avoiding this simple question ! )

    What would happen to those funds, should they discover the theory is flawed ?

    Please explain to us what the “carbon industry” is ?

    Do you mean this carbon ? “Carbon occurs in all known organic life and is the basis of organic chemistry.”

    So are you saying the organics industry is behind all this ? Or are you just using emotive meaningless non-scientific terms to support your argument?

    PS. Don’t forget those questions about who is paying the “climate scientists” ….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    Kea you just spout shit
    RRM was right not worth the time of day

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Griff, How about answering the questions and laying off the personal abuse ?

    If I met with approval of the likes of RRM, I would be having a serious look at myself. You can do as RRM has done and magnify your ignorance by blocking out any opposing points of view. Go for it.

    Your own credibility is going fast, due to your failure to answer simple open questions or admit self evident truths.

    The oil industry makes money from selling oil. What funds the AGW industry?…. of course we all know the answer. All you have left are personal attacks and abuse.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Griff (3,702) Says:
    January 5th, 2013 at 11:58 am
    Kea you just spout shit
    RRM was right not worth the time of day

    weak

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Griff,

    AGW is based on sound science

    But your catastrophic global warming is not. And there’s the difference which you still completely fail to grasp.

    Catastrophic global warming is the hypothesis that there will be runaway positive feed-backs, since even the most blinkered alarmist admits that the direct effect of increased CO2 is modest and inconsequential (and quite probably of positive benefit.)

    This hypothesised feed-back loop has never been observed and has nothing whatsoever to do with “sound science.” There is every reason to believe that it doesn’t exist and that instead negative feed-back dominates.
    And as we have mentioned before, the fingerprints which would distinguish forced warming from natural variation are entirely absent: we don’t see enhanced warming in the troposphere and we don’t see enhanced warming at the poles.

    It seems that every time you post on this subject you advertise yet again your complete and total ignorance. And that’s when you’re not blatently lying.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Griff, I guess I should answer your 10:46 am, as I am happy to enter genuine debate.

    I will accept all you cut n’ pasted , at face value. Climate change is real. Change is the normal state for climate. I believe that mans activities have some effect on climate. So far so good… Where I differ is the claim of drastic climate change due entirely to mans influence. That is rubbish and is driven by people with other agendas. The real motives behind the AGW cult are well reported on and freely available. I do not intend to traverse them now.

    Eventually the AGW funding will change and I predict that the “scientific consensus” will change with it. I suspect you will live to see that day. What you won’t see will be the dire predictions made turning into reality.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Democrats pull plug on gun ammo ban

    Freedom and democracy is winning

    Democrats in the Illinois Senate have failed to gain enough support for legislation that would have outlawed 50 percent of long guns on the market in the state and would have confiscated weapons owned by citizens.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Bilderberg Elite Angry Over “Constant Exposure”

    According to veteran journalist Jim Tucker, Bilderberg elitists are furious over the “constant exposure” the secretive group is receiving in the European media, forcing members to consider the unprecedented step of holding the organization’s annual meeting in the United States for two years running.

    The US corporate media routinely ignores what would normally be considered a sensational story – over 100 of the world’s most powerful people – including the likes of Eric Schmidt, Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller, Herman van Rompuy, and the Queen of the Netherlands – meeting behind closed doors to discuss the future of the world.

    However, European news outlets have given the event more intense press coverage in recent years, leading Bilderberg members to prefer the relative anonymity they are afforded by the more controlled U.S. media.

    “A source at the November 30-December 3 meeting in Washington of Bilderberg’s North American Group overheard Richard Armitage, a deputy secretary of state under President George W. Bush, say Bilderberg and the TC (Trilateral Commission) are angry over “their constant exposure,” adding that organizers were contemplating holding the next Bilderberg meeting in the U.S. in order to keep a lower profile,” writes Tucker, who notes that it will be a significant financial burden for Bilderberg to change their venue given that they have to book out an entire luxury hotel two years in advance.

    So has the Bilderberg Group been hounded out of Europe? Has the glare of the media spotlight in Europe forced the cabal to take the unprecedented step of hosting their conference in America for two years running?

    2011 proved to be a bad year for Bilderberg. Despite choosing to host their conference half way up a mountain in the remote Swiss resort of St. Moritz, hundreds of protesters were encamped right outside the Suvretta hotel. Members of both the European and Swiss parliaments attempted to enter the conference, prompting unwelcome press coverage, and Bilderberg attendees themselves were confronted by inquisitive demonstrators during an afternoon stroll down the mountain.

    Returning to America in 2012, Bilderberg were able to rely on tighter security and a compliant media that virtually blacklisted their presence.

    It seems unlikely that the 2013 confab won’t be held somewhere in Europe given the fact that every time the event has taken place in the States, the following year it has switched to the other continent. In addition, the annual confab of Bilderberg’s sister organization, the Trilateral Commission, will take place in Berlin, Germany from March 15-17.

    The last time Bilderberg held their conference in Chantilly Virginia, the following year it was held in Athens, Greece.

    The theme of Bilderberg members expressing vitriol at the fact that their conferences are being protested by larger and more vocal crowds of people has repeatedly cropped up in recent years.

    During last year’s confab in Chantilly, a source working inside the Westfields Marriott hotel told London Guardian journalist Charlie Skelton that Bilderberg attendees referred to protesters outside the hotel as “cockroaches”.

    During the 2010 Bilderberg meeting in Spain, members were overheard complaining about the fact that demonstrators could even afford to travel to different countries in order to make their voices heard and that the fact they still had an income that allowed them to do so was a “permanent threat” to and “very scary” to Bilderberg’s agenda.

    http://intellectualodditiesnetwork.com/showthread.php?tid=17076&pid=156197

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Reid (16,440 comments) says:

    Who is Chris Rodia? Just the guy whose car got towed away from Sandy Hook. But that doesn’t mean anything, does it. Der.

    http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2012/12/did-illuminati-leave-cryptic-message-on-conspiracy-forum-website-who-is-christopher-rodia-2447028.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. lilman (957 comments) says:

    Just a query, if there is no kyoto agreement ,why are we still paying for that tax added to petrol by the labour government when the so called climate minister at the time stated ” ITS ONLY 5 CENTS A LITRE TO COMBAT THE EFFECTS OF GLOBAL WARMING FOR EVER”
    Even reading it now it makes you think DUMB ARSE !!!!!!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    National implemented a smoking ban, not because they care about the lungs of prisoners, they implemented the ban because of their double bunking policy. The Government were warned that their double bunking policy could open them to legal action by any prisoner impacted negatively by second hand smoke. This is arse covering due to our very high imprisonment rates.

    To pretend to care about the welfare of prisoners when it’s really hiding the symptom of our incarceration mentality is a clever trick. Rather than asking why we are double bunking prisoners, the story becomes about prisoner rights. Seeing as most NZers want orange jump-suited prisoners in chain gangs breaking rock while singing gospel tunes, it’s a debate that quickly turns into anger at the mere idea prisoners are human beings, let along have any sort of ‘rights’.

    http://tumeke.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/the-real-reason-we-banned-smoking-in.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Reid (16,440 comments) says:

    Seeing as most NZers want orange jump-suited prisoners in chain gangs breaking rock while singing gospel tunes, it’s a debate that quickly turns into anger at the mere idea prisoners are human beings, let along have any sort of ‘rights’.

    No that’s the lefty hallucination of what they think “most NZers” want hinamanu. Lefties are so fucking dumb, you see, that the mentals can’t get it through their thick skulls that just because people don’t agree with them, this doesn’t mean they have all sorts of harsh brutal motivations behind their disagreement. Lefties think they’re so fucking brainy that such motivations are the only possible reason reason why anyone wouldn’t see things their way. Completely failing to recognise of course that some people might just understand human nature much much better than they do and this is the reason for their disagreement. But lefties can’t see that, because they’re so monstrously arrogant they think it’s not possible for anyone to be brainier than they are, on anything.

    Aren’t lefties scum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Believe it or not, the Trans-Texas Corridor is back.

    Very quietly, Gov. Rick Perry and the Texas Department of Transportation, or TxDOT, signed in October a comprehensive development agreement to construct a toll-road redevelopment of Interstate 35 north of downtown Fort Worth.

    TxDOT signed the 50-year deal with NTE Mobility Partners Segments 3 LLC, a U.S.-based wholly-owned subsidiary of Cintra, the Spanish-owned construction company. TxDOT picked Cintra in 2005 to build what some critics called the “NAFTA Super Highway.”

    Chris Lippincot, the former TxDOT information officer who is currently acting as the new public relations man for Cintra in the United States, also announced TxDOT signed a contract in September with Cintra to build a privatized State Highway 130 toll road in San Antonio.

    Jerome Corsi’s “America for Sale” exposes the globalists’ effort to put America on the chopping block

    Perry may never have abandoned his original idea to build what during the presidential administration of George W. Bush was known as the Trans-Texas Corridor project, a 4,000-mile network of privately built and operated toll roads to crisscross the state, with Spanish development company Cintra scheduled to earn the tolls under 50-year leases.

    In 2009, Perry scrapped the TTC plan after a series of combative town hall meetings throughout the state showed TxDOT it faced massive taxpayer resistance.

    But now, the plan apparently is being implemented in small chunks, without the fanfare of divulging a statewide blueprint Perry and TxDOT may still have tucked away in their back pockets.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    Seeing as most NZers want orange jump-suited prisoners in chain gangs breaking rock while singing gospel tunes

    Wrong. There will be no gospel singing on my chain-gangs thank you very much. Just work.

    As for the real reasons behind the no smoking policy – who cares? It’s a prison. And why should prison guards be subjected to 2nd hand smoke when the rest of the working population isn’t?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    @Reid

    It has just been judged that the govt illegally introduced non smoking in prisons which you may observe in the link I gave

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    In saying this I do believe prison should be prison. Although inmates should be treated on case to case priority.

    Some guy not paying his fines shouldn’t be treated like a dangerous rapist or murderer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. axeman (252 comments) says:

    And another one for the … well you know what files… Where is the mainstream media and Gwiff now?

    http://notrickszone.com/2013/01/04/northern-hemisphere-snow-cover-sets-all-time-december-record-9-million-sq-km-more-than-32-years-ago/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. axeman (252 comments) says:

    And it is very ‘warm’ in India :-) Plus Alaska is tropical

    http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2013/01/04/new-delhi-suffers-though-its-coldest-day-in-44-years/

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. axeman (252 comments) says:

    Greenland could do with some CAGW as well :-)

    http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/407435_478809372170994_307689551_n.jpg

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    British “environmentalist” finally gets his head out of his arse in a lecture to the Oxford Farming Conference:

    I want to start with some apologies. For the record, here and upfront, I apologise for having spent several years ripping up GM crops. I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid 1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonising an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.

    As an environmentalist, and someone who believes that everyone in this world has a right to a healthy and nutritious diet of their choosing, I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path. I now regret it completely.

    So I guess you’ll be wondering – what happened between 1995 and now that made me not only change my mind but come here and admit it? Well, the answer is fairly simple: I discovered science, and in the process I hope I became a better environmentalist.

    http://www.marklynas.org [currently down]

    His Wikipedia entry has been updated to reflect his conversion: “Lynas criticized organizations with which he was previously associated including Greenpeace and organic trade groups like the U.K. Soil Association for ignoring scientific facts about genetically modified crop safety and benefits because it conflicted with their ideologies and stated he “was completely wrong to oppose GMOs.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    Wat and nuttyspurt

    Please don’t put your words into my mouth they taste like shite.

    Drastic climate change catastrophic global warmingThe Alarmism seems to be more on your side than mine.

    Define these new phrases you have added to the discussion.

    And axe man thanks for the weather report fasctanting :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    Oh and watt how many times do you need to be too old to check your story.

    More on his confession

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/01/03/mark_lynas_environmentalist_who_opposed_gmos_admits_he_was_wrong.html

    His honest assessment of his heretofore poor understanding of the issue continues for almost 5,000 words—and it’s a must-read for anyone who has ever hesitated over conventional produce. To vilify GMOs is to be as anti-science as climate-change deniers,

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Griff,

    You clearly don’t understand that there is all the difference in the world between understanding that CO2 is a (trace) greenhouse gas and believing in so-called catastrophic global warming.

    Once you manage to grasp that vital distinction – if you ever do – you will realise that there is no “sound science” behind the latter, because it is based entirely on alleged feed-backs which don’t exist outside of computer models.

    As I mentioned, the signature which would identify late 20th century warming as anthopogenically forced is entirely absent. That is sound science.

    There has been no warming for 16 years. That is sound science.

    All you alarmists have are computer models which, by definitions, simply reflect the ignorance and prejudices of the programmers. Take this model-based claim from 2007:

    Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013′

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm

    Well, here we are. Do you believe that this summer there will be no ice in the Arctic?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    It is no use wat. He will not answer any question that will call his cult into question. It is a shame, Griff is normally pretty rational on most other topics. This is what religion does to peoples ability to reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Where’s Luc?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Kea (12,777 comments) says:

    Where’s Luc?

    Maybe he has taken my advice and moved to the glorious workers paradise of North Korea ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    Pointless discussing science with wat and kea they just make stuff up

    There has been no warming for 16 years…… Scientific facts.

    Dont you mean almost no warming for almost 16years

    almost true …..eh……

    :lol:

    daily mail again wat nonscience and tittys for idiots

    RWNJ alert

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. kowtow (8,428 comments) says:

    gruff

    “RWNJ”?

    Apart from being warmist is another one of your problems being a leftist?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Griff,

    Dont you mean almost no warming for almost 16years

    No, I mean no statistically significant warming for 16 years.

    And please don’t humiliate yourself again trying to argue that statistical significance – the essential technique which allows us to distinguish signal from noise – is meaningless. The embarrassment we feel for you when you do that is buttock-clenchingly awful.

    You really should get with the program: Alarmists are meant to handle this inconvenient truth by referring to it as a “pause” or “hiatus” in warming. Implying, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, that it will soon start increasing again.
    Even “scientists” (sic) central to the whole scam – people like James Hansen and Kevin Trenberth – are now falling over themselves trying to explain away this absence of warming:

    http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/candid-comments-from-global-warming-climate-scientists/

    So you’re left looking an even bigger tit that ever: humiliating yourself and showing your complete dishonesty by trying to dismiss the notion of statistical significance so that you can fraudulently claim a warming trend, while at the same time senior alarmists are pulling excuses out of their arses trying to explain away the complete lack of promised warming.

    Are you saying those alarmists are also wrong when they acknowledge the lack of recent warming? If so – if they are too stupid to read a simple chart – why should we trust their opinion on the global warming generally?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    :lol:

    no warming is not no warming its almost no warming :lol:

    you forgot the sientific almost sixteen years lol:

    idiot

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    It’s like watching a four year old showing-off isn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. nasska (11,468 comments) says:

    This blog ratings war is getting serious. Whale has flogged gay marriage threads to excite the God botherers & DPF counters with Bain posts which agitate the would be jurists to the point where the viability of the internet to cope with the traffic is in doubt.

    In this cyberbattle there can be only one winner……I predict that the end will be bloody! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. nasska (11,468 comments) says:

    They say you’ll never forget your first kiss. This is Griff’s story…..

    “Her name was Sally and she lived next door. My best friend, well for all of that summer. So out playing one day down by the farm, we’d stopped for shelter from a shower of rain in an old barn. I was playfully running my fingers through Sally’s hair when she started to kiss me; her mouth slightly open, I could feel her tongue with mine.

    It was my first real kiss, and I loved it. I fell head over heels in love that day.

    We often visited the barn during that long, hot summer and it didn’t stop at just kissing, but sadly a couple of months later Sally was involved in a car accident and had to be put down.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Griff (7,675 comments) says:

    What do you expect Wat

    Respect :lol:

    When you post something that you know is a lie.

    No warming for sixteen years is a definite statement yet the fifteen and a half years you refer to do does have a warming trend

    The correct statement would be there probably was a warming trend

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Griff (3,708) Says:
    January 5th, 2013 at 8:08 pm
    What do you expect Wat

    Respect

    When you post something that you know is a lie.

    No warming for sixteen years is a definite statement yet the fifteen and a half years you refer to do does have a warming trend

    The correct statement would be there probably was a warming trend

    How embarrassing.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    wat,

    there is just the usual attempt to get to grips with the complexity of the science. From your link.

    From Susan Solomon

    Already Solomon had shown that between 2000 and 2009, the amount of water vapor in the stratosphere declined by about 10 percent. This decline, caused either by natural variability — perhaps related to El Niño — or as a feedback to climate change, likely countered 25 percent of the warming that would have been caused by rising greenhouse gases. (Some scientists have found that estimate to be high.) Now, another dynamic seemed to be playing out above the clouds.

    In a paper published this summer, Solomon, Vernier and others brought these discrete facts to their conclusion, estimating that these aerosols caused a cooling trend of 0.07 degrees Celsius over the past decade. Like the water vapor, it was not a single answer, but it was a small player. These are the type of low-grade influences that future climate models will have to incorporate, Livermore’s Santer said.

    From Jim Hansen

    These revelations are prompting the science’s biggest names to change their views.

    Indeed, the most important outcome from the energy hunt may be that researchers are chronically underestimating air pollution’s reflective effect, said NASA’s James Hansen, head of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

    Recent data has forced him to revise his views on how much of the sun’s energy is stored in the oceans, committing the planet to warming. Instead, he says, air pollution from fossil fuel burning, directly and indirectly, has been masking greenhouse warming more than anyone knew.

    It was in no “way affected by the nonsensical statements of contrarians,” Hansen said. “These are fundamental matters that the science has always been focused on. The problem has been the absence of [scientific] observations.”

    NASA’s Hansen disputes that worry about skeptics drove climate scientists to ignore the sun’s climate influence. His team, he said, has “always included solar forcing based on observations and Judith’s estimates for the period prior to accurate observations.”

    “That makes the sun a bit more important, because the solar variability modulates the net planetary energy imbalance,” Hansen said. “But the solar forcing is too small to make the net imbalance negative, i.e., solar variations are not going to cause global cooling.”

    “Unfortunately, when we focus on volcanic aerosol forcing, solar forcing and stratospheric water vapor changes, it is a case of looking for our lost keys under the streetlight,” Hansen said. “What we need to look at is the tropospheric aerosol forcing, but it is not under the street light.”

    “I suspect that there has been increased aerosols with the surge in coal use over the past half decade or so,” he said. “There is semi-quantitative evidence of that in the regions where it is expected. Unfortunately, the problem is that we are not measuring aerosols well enough to determine their forcing and how it is changing.”

    More fundamentally, the Argo probe data has prompted Hansen to revise his understanding of how the climate works in a fundamental way, a change he lays out in a sure-to-be-controversial paper to be published later this year.

    For decades, scientists have known that most of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases was going into the ocean, not the atmosphere; as a result, even if emissions stopped tomorrow, they said, the atmosphere would continue to warm as it sought balance with the overheated oceans. In a term Hansen coined, this extra warming would be “in the pipeline,” its effects lingering for years and years. But exactly how much warming would be in the pipeline depended on how efficiently heat mixed down into the oceans.

    Hansen now believes he has an answer: All the climate models, compared to the Argo data and a tracer study soon to be released by several NASA peers, exaggerate how efficiently the ocean mixes heat into its recesses. Their unanimity in this efficient mixing could be due to some shared ancestry in their code. Whatever the case, it means that climate models have been overestimating the amount of energy in the climate, seeking to match the surface warming that would occur with efficient oceans. They were solving a problem, Hansen says, that didn’t exist.

    At first glance, this could easily sound like good news, if true. But it’s not.

    “Less efficient mixing, other things being equal, would mean that there is less warming ‘in the pipeline,’” Hansen said. “But it also implies that the negative aerosol forcing is probably larger than most models assumed. So the Faustian aerosol bargain is probably more of a problem than had been assumed.”

    From Judith Lean

    The answer to the hiatus, according to Judith Lean, is all in the stars. Or rather, one star.

    Only recently have climate modelers followed how that 0.1 percent can influence the world’s climate over decade-long spans. (According to best estimates, it gooses temperatures by 0.1 degrees Celsius.) Before then, the sun, to quote the late comedian Rodney Dangerfield, got no respect, according to Lean, a voluble solar scientist working out of the the space science division of the Naval Research Laboratory, a radar-bedecked facility tucked away down in the southwest tail of Washington, D.C.

    Climate models failed to reflect the sun’s cyclical influence on the climate and “that has led to a sense that the sun isn’t a player,” Lean said. “And that they have to absolutely prove that it’s not a player.”

    According to Lean, the combination of multiple La Niñas and the solar minimum, bottoming out for an unusually extended time in 2008 from its peak in 2001, are all that’s needed to cancel out the increased warming from rising greenhouse gases. Now that the sun has begun to gain in activity again, Lean suspects that temperatures will rise in parallel as the sun peaks around 2014.

    This consistent trend has prompted Lean to take a rare step for a climate scientist: She’s made a short-term prediction. By 2014, she projects global surface temperatures to increase by 0.14 degrees Celsius, she says, driven by human warming and the sun.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    Nice graph showing the solar cycle in relation to temperature.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. axeman (252 comments) says:

    And latest research from Earth Scientists (yeah yeah I know … gwiff (again) will call them nutters)

    “…our rejection of AGW is not absolute; it might be a false positive, and we cannot rule out the possibility that recent global warming has an anthropogenic footprint. However, this possibility is very small, and is not statistically significant at conventional levels.”

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/03/agw-bombshell-a-new-paper-shows-statistical-tests-for-global-warming-fails-to-find-statistically-significantly-anthropogenic-forcing/

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Left Right and Centre (2,973 comments) says:

    Fletch…

    Catholic schools aren’t as Catholic as they used to be mate. They’re part of the state system. Or some bollocks. State integrated… there you go.

    They don’t sit around all day talking about the fucking bible mate… they actually teach stuff like maths and science etc so some weirdo parents send their kids to them for the actual education curriculum side of things. I think they can even opt out of fairytale time. Those parents think that the catholick schools are better somehow. Less riff-raff. A cut above. ooo… they’ve got a uniform at primary age… must be respectable. At the end of the day… they’re state schools. Of course they take non-catholicks. Taxpayers are paying for them to have their own ‘special’ separatist schools. A lot of those parents don’t give a toss about superstition… they think they’re getting a better school in terms of education by sending their kids there.

    History proves me wrong? What the fuck are you bleating about? Honestly… non-sensical internet looney-tunes dribbling.

    I wouldn’t argue with an idiot because then there’s two idiots. The idiot, and the one who argues with him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote