I would like to know what sample and demographic all these national polls are getting their numbers from with their popular vote?

Here’s your conspiracy, you see it just about everyday.

Then the herald gets hammered for doctoring the poll. What makes you think national spin ringstingers don’t either?

What did these idiots think? That there wasn’t going to be a period of mass loss before the new change began? It’s just like our navy, we don’t have any sailors anymore. There’s one thing i’ve learned in life is that people love to be talk beaten into accepting something if the uncertainty of their future can be introduced. Typical national tactic. Hosking should be sacked off his morning show as he geeks out nationals look.

And even uber-ALARMIST James Annan admits “high climate sensitivity increasingly untenable”
http://notrickszone.com/2013/02/01/staggering-admission-by-james-annan-high-climate-sensitivity-increasingly-untenable/

Yet we will have to put up with the ALARMISTS’ useful idiot gwiffucknuckle, spinning the OLD bullshit CAGW line

Face it GRIEF, the wheels are falling off and your alarmist hoax will be over soon …

HISTORY OF GLOBAL WARMING SCEPTICISM

“First they tried to convince us with the evidence
Then when we showed the evidence didn’t support them, they manufactured the evidence
Then when we explained that their “evidence” didn’t prove their case
… They tried to tell us we (the majority) were the ill-informed minority
Then when it became clear we were far from ill-informed and far less a small minority.
They tried to ridicule us
Then when we laughed at their attempts to ridicule us
They tried to sue us
Then when they realised that threatening to sue when the evidence supported us
They tried to tell us we were mad. etc.
Finally … in the face of overwhelming evidence and lack of public interest in their non-science they get over their tantrum, they stop writing idiotic papers to journals and stop helping to write ridiculous articles for journalists … it all goes quite
and then they try to pretend it never happened.”

We all used to enjoy a good laugh at matching the weathermans computer generated weather predictions with actual events. It is less funny now that people with other motives are using the simple weatherman as a vehicle for political change. Sad really.

Yeah the Indian train driver seems to be able to accept it. Then Pachauri quietly pretends to like skeptics. It’s all PR to keep the gravy train running.

http://joannenova.com.au/2013/02/pachauri-quietly-blows-goalposts-away-pretends-to-like-skeptics-its-all-pr-to-keep-the-gravy-train-running/

Climate Scientists Predicts a ‘Mini Ice Age’ in the Future Amid Evidence Of Sun’s Diminishing Acitivity

NASA’s prediction that the sun’s next 11-year activity phase or “Cycle 25: will be one of the weakest in centuries and is likely to decrease until 2100, has led some scientists to foresee a “mini ice age” in the future.

Experts at NASA and the University of Arizona analyzed data derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface and concluded that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still.

According to climate scientists, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a “grand minimum” in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Data issued recently by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit confirmed that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

For every scary piece of data held up by ALARMISTS as proof of man-made global warming, it seems a bit of contrary evidence is uncovered — and, of course, is ignored. Let’s see what Antarctica is telling us.

http://www.thegwpf.org/antarctic-ice-planet/

Like all MPs, Tim Yeo is paid £65,000 a year. But he never has to make do with just that. Last year alone, three ‘green’ companies paid the Conservative MP for South Suffolk £135,970.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283558/How-MPs-pay-subsidised-eco-firms-set-insane-new-carbon-targets-send-heating-bills-sky-rocketing.html#ixzz2LsVkhwgQ

EXPLODING THE MYTHS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE
MYTH The world is continually getting warmer.
TRUTH Official Met Office data shows no statistically significant global temperature rise since January 1997. The fact was confirmed last week by Raj Pachauri, chairman of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Many scientists say this means forecasts of how much warmer the world will be by 2100 must be revised downwards. Pachauri disagreed: for him to be convinced, the ‘pause’ would have to last 30 years.

MYTH Global warming is already causing extreme weather.
TRUTH If anything, weather has become less, not more extreme in the past 50 years. Professor Roger Pielke Jr of Colorado University – no climate sceptic – last week said that the past seven years had been the longest period ever recorded without a Category 3 or stronger hurricane hitting America, and that drought has decreased since the mid-20th Century. The IPCC admits there is no evidence that global warming has caused more storms in the tropics.

MYTH If we don’t take swift, drastic action to cut CO2 emissions, the world will soon become uninhabitable
TRUTH The ‘pause’ in rising temperatures, along with new research into the decline in the sun’s output and other natural factors, is leading many scientists to lower estimates of how fast carbon dioxide warms the world. Until now, the IPCC has suggested that doubling CO2 causes a worrying increase of 3.5C, but many experts say it is about 1.7C. The computer models still say the world will be at least 2C warmer by the end of the century, but they failed to predict the pause.

MYTH We’ve got to do our bit, even if it hurts. If we cut emissions, the rest of the world will follow.
TRUTH The fiasco of the 2009 UN climate conference in Copenhagen proved that China, India, Brazil and other fast-growing nations are simply not prepared to make any binding commitments to reduce their emissions. However, by cutting our own ever more deeply, all we do is increase the already rocketing price of our energy and so drive jobs abroad – while making almost no difference to world CO2 levels.

MYTH The faster we cut carbon in our power generation, the more prosperous we will be.
TRUTH We face declining energy capacity, while the Government targets on 2030 emissions would mean few firms will be willing to invest in the one proven type of power source – gas – that can fill the gap relatively cheaply. Instead of ‘green growth’, we face years of impoverished stagnation, while industry flees Britain and our sky-high energy prices.

MYTH The Arctic is going to be ice-free in summer in a few years.
TRUTH Although last summer saw a return to the relatively low levels of ice seen in 2007, the growth of Arctic winter ice this year is the fastest on record. Canadian archaeologists have been finding evidence the ice cover shrank to half its current extent during a warm period 7,000 years ago – but never vanished entirely.
.

This calls for two things. Firstly we need a bullshit detector to identify the cases, and sometimes the people, one should avoid taking at all seriously, while bearing in mind that there can be real and nasty conspiracies, sometimes reaching all the way to the tops of governments (Rwanda, Watergate, Suez, etc). Conspiracy thinkers typically assert that all they are doing is following a skeptical stance to received information. In fact what they are following is a radical epistemic stance of ‘possibilism’ – anything that is possible deserves equal status and consideration as knowledge. This position completely rejects one of the central concerns and foundations of successful civilisation: the project of cumulatively and collectively enhancing our understanding of how the world works. They ask, ‘How do you know the Jews/Free Masons/French government aren’t behind this [unusual world event]?’ They say, ‘It is up to the Official Story to prove itself by disproving every other possibility’. In fact it is the skeptic who has the burden of proving the plausibility of her critique.

Secondly we need to stand up to the nonsense propagated by conspiracy thinkers. What they are doing is not harmless. It is drivel but it is dangerous drivel that can kill people directly, or crowd out and make impossible rational debate (and hence grown-up politics), leading to yet further conspiracy thinking and nastiness.

Since conspiracy theorists often claim that the world actually works quite differently than our common sense tells us, discrepancies there don’t necessarily provide a simple way to distinguish bullshit. Internal coherence is therefore a useful independent test since, in principle, it can be used to assess the 1st order sensibleness of a claim even under the charitable assumption that the world is like that. In principle this should also provide an alternative route to criticising conspiracy claims in terms the conspiracy thinkers themselves might accept, since the problem is not that they are stupid, but that they come to foolish conclusions.

You realise of course Travistock has a meme going on this, it’s been in place for decades. It is why people hesitate to say what they really think – lest they be j’accused [of being a nut].

It is why for example even though looking at JFK it’s obvious it wasn’t LHO acting alone, people won’t say that unless someone else in the room says it first. Lest they be j’accused, you see. Even though it’s so obvious in that case you’d have to be a village idiot with a lobotomy not to have privately concluded it.

But you see, Travistock rely on the implications. They’re unthinkable. After all, if JFK really wasn’t killed by LHO acting alone, this means the US govt [gasp] has covered it up for over 50 years. And with President after President, Administration after Administration, how could that possibli be? SOMEONE would have said something. SOMETHING would have leaked. THEREFORE, it didn’t happen like that, and there MUST, there HAS TO BE some other explanation.

That’s the Travistock meme you see. It just COULDN’T be true based on the world as [x] knows it, THEREFORE it is NOT true. It CAN’T be. And you can run through the list, on and on and on and on. And it goes way back before JFK of course, I just use that because it’s the “classic” example which most people would recognise. And it’s happened since too, of course. Many times, since then. Very recently in fact.

But that thinking, sadly, is the level of the memers a.k.a. most people alive.

Not because it’s not true, but simple because their hearts and minds just can’t deal with two opposing concepts at the same time.

And it’s got nothing to do with intelligence, it has everything to do with emotional balance.

Now there is a very, very sad sack case.

nutjob or conspitorwacky ?

whichever it is , it’s so very sad that he puts so much effort into, devotes everything he has into ….

why does he waste his energy ?
Day in, day out. Year in, yearr out.

has he nothing else, poor sod.

why not just get a life Griff ?

Think. How much more productive your sad life could be.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/2/prweb10458633.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=Dr.+Asher+Kimchi&button=&title=Special%3ASearch

conspirowhacky
nutjob

http://www.uea.ac.uk/~j097/CONSP01.htm

CRITICAL THINKING ABOUT CONSPIRACY THEORIES

No serious historian denies that a somewhat amateurish conspiracy lay behind the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, or that a more professional but sadly less successful conspiracy attempted to assassinate Adolf Hitler in the summer of 1944. Yet such is the presumption behind the cock-up stance that the existence or frequency of genuine conspiracies is often significantly downplayed.

Yes, but, by and large, that’s because they’re nobodies. There are lots of obscure people in the Wikipedia. Hinamanu claimed that Garrow was wolrd-renowned. The fact there isn’t anything at all in there on him – not even a one-line entry – shows that this claim is false and that he isn’t world-renowned. He appears to be nothing more than a conman who has been investigated by the media, and the police, once or twice rather than a “world-renowned educator and human rights activist”.

Hinamanu got sucked in by his/her source basically.