Apple just released its 2015 Environmental Responsibility Report, which addressed hot-button issues like climate change. Before talking about how the company would be reducing its effects on the environment in the coming year, it got straight to the point and said:
“We don’t want to debate climate change. We want to stop it.”
Apple is one of the biggest hypocrite companies on the face of the earth:
They ban travel to Indiana while allowing sales of their products to countries that subjugate women They are notorious for looking the other way in regard to the child labor that build their products. Their Iphones are assembled in China, which is a cesspool of coal powered plants... The rare earth minerals needed for their products are mined without regard to safety in Indonesia..
Another example of do as I say, not as I do...
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
A Brief History of Fantastically Wrong Climate Change Predictions
Bookmark and Share RSS
Posted Thursday, March 26th 2015 @ 8am The modern environmentalist movement began in earnest in 1970, when activists founded Earth Day as a way to call attention to the ways in which man-made climate change was destroying the planet.
Then, as now, those activists claimed a scientific consensus about just how devastating the impact of climate change would be, yet for 45 years now, scientists (not activists, scientists) have been consistently wrong in their doomsday predictions.
Wisconsin Senator Gaylord Nelson, the father of Earth Day said before the first Earth Day in 1970 that “the secretary of the Smithsonian Institute believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”
Not to be outdone, Life Magazine reported that same year that “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich, the celebrated author of The Climate Bomb, wrote in 1971 that "by the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people … If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”
In 1975 Newsweek ran a now-infamous article entitled “The Cooling World,” which cited several climate scientists in concluding that “the central fact is that…the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down…If the climate change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic.”
Global famine was a popular prediction in the 70’s. North Texas State professor Pete Gunter summed up the prevailing sentiment when he wrote in “The Lving Wilderness” that by “by the year 2000...the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”
In 1986, NASA scientist James Hansen testified before Congress that “global temperatures should be nearly 2 degrees higher in 20 years, ‘which is about the warmest the earth has been in the last 100,000 years.’”
Two years later, Dr. Hansen told an interviewer that in 20 years, the area below his New York City office would be completely changed, most notably that “the West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water.”
Even the great Carl Sagan predicted in 1990 that “the planet could face an ‘ecological and agricultural catastrophe’ by the next decade if global warming trends continue.”
That same year, Dr. Michael Oppenheimer with The Environmental Defense Fund wrote:
By 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots…”(By 1996) The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers…The Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico seeking work as field hands.
As recently as the last decade, both Dr. Hansen and Peter Wadhams, the head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group at the University of Cambridge, believe “that the Arctic is likely to become ice-free...as early as 2015.”
That’s actually two years later than Al Gore predicted in 2007, 2008, and 2009, when he cited what he called a scientific consensus to claim that the North Pole would be “ice free by 2013.”
That’s good, because Pentagon scientists sure weren’t in 2003, when their report “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and its Implications for United States National Security” warned that within 10 years, “it was not implausible” that parts of California would be flooded, parts of the Netherlands would be uninhabitable, and an unprecedented rise in hurricanes, tsunamis, and tornadoes would spark wars across the globe as people fought for increasingly scarce resources.
Not to be outdone, scientists with the United Nations Environment Programme warned in 2005 that man-made global warming would so decimate coastal areas as well as the Caribbean and Pacific islands that there would be upwards of 50 million “climate refugees by 2010.”
Of course, none of these scientific predictions—from Earth Day straight through today—have ever actually been right, but more predictions keep coming...along with more admonitions that the science is settled.
Email Dan O'Donnell Follow Him on Social Media Twitter | Facebook
As Pope Francis “prepares to deliver what is likely to be a highly influential encyclical this summer on environmental degradation and the effects of human-caused climate change on the poor, he is alarming some conservatives in the United States who are loath to see the Catholic Church reposition itself as a mighty voice in a cause they do not believe in,” the New York Times reports.
“As part of the effort for the encyclical, top Vatican officials will hold a summit meeting Tuesday to build momentum for a campaign by Francis to urge world leaders to enact a sweeping United Nations climate change accord in Paris in December. The accord would for the first time commit every nation to enact tough new laws to cut the emissions that cause global warming.”
Isn't the Pope Infallible???
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
NASA Study Shows Antarctica’s Larsen B Ice Shelf Nearing Its Final Act
Quoted Text
A new NASA study finds the last remaining section of Antarctica's Larsen B Ice Shelf, which partially collapsed in 2002, is quickly weakening and likely to disintegrate completely before the end of the decade. This ancient structure has existed for over 10,000 years. As it melts, it would significantly contribute to global sea level rise.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
It is time to realize that we CANNOT curb climate change enough to stop sea level rises to the degree that it would not SEVERELY impact coastal cities like New Orleans. If we are going to try to transform our energy economy with things like carbon taxes we MUST also STOP all development on impacted coastal areas and make plans to force-ably re-locate populations to higher ground or say they are on their own. Spending BILLIONS on building on Seawalls and levee systems that could be destroyed in a Sandy type storm makes absolutely no economic sense.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Of course, Boxy has already cast this off as heresy.
I, for one, welcome an open-minded, unbiased and uncensored review and analysis of the data since there seems to be some really major discrepancies between the raw data and the 'adjusted' data.
Climatologists have long been aware of the poor state of global surface temperature records and considerable effort has been put into adjusting the raw data to correct known errors and biases.
These adjustments are not insignificant. For example it has been noted that in the temperature series prepared by NOAA for the USA, the adjusted data exhibits a much larger warming trend than the raw data.
has also been noted that over the years changes to the data have often tended to cool the early part of the record and to warm more recent years, increasing the apparent warming trend.
Although the reasons for the adjustments that are made to the raw data are understood in broad terms, for many of the global temperature series the details are obscure and it has proved difficult for outsiders to determine whether they are valid and applied consistently.
For all these reasons, the global surface temperature records have been the subject of considerable and ongoing controversy.
The panel....
Terence Kealey (Chairman): Professor Terence Kealey was until recently the vice-chancellor of the University of Buckingham. He trained initially in London as a doctor before specialising, at Oxford, in clinical biochemical research. He subsequently lectured at Cambridge for many years before moving to Buckingham, where he was appointed professor and where he became vice-chancellor in 2001. As well as publishing many research papers on the metabolism and cell biology of human skin, Professor Kealey has written two books to show that there is no economic case for the government funding of science.
Petr Chylek: Dr Chylek is a physicist by training. After working at universities in the USA and Canada he took up a post at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico where he now specialises in remote sensing. He has been lead author on over 100 peer-reviewed publications in a wide range of subjects, including radiative physics, climate change, cloud and aerosol physics, laser physics and ice core analysis. He is a fellow of the American Geophysical Union, Optical Society of America, and Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Richard McNider: Richard McNider is Distinguished Professor of Science at the University of Alabama, Huntsville. Professor McNider's career has focused on applied environmental questions, from the Bhopal disaster to the physics of the atmospheric boundary layer. He is a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society and was honoured by the American Meteorological Society in 2013 for his outstanding contributions to applied meteorology. He was the founder of the atmospheric sciences program at UAH and has also served as Alabama state climatologist.
Roman Mureika: {NOTE: Of all the members of this panel, I'll be most interested in his findings} Professor Roman Mureika is a statistician who worked at the University of New Brunswick until his retirement in 2008. He brings to the inquiry his considerable expertise in identification and analysis of errors in the use of statistical methodology with particular reference to its application to environmental data Outside his academic research, Professor Mureika has provided statistical consultancy services to bodies in both the private and public sectors and has served on the board of the Statistical Society of Canada.
Roger A Pielke Sr: Professor Pielke is a meteorologist and climatologist. He is professor emeritus of Colorado State University and is currently a Senior Research Scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder. He is a fellow of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society, and was previously the chairman of the AMS committee on weather forecasting and analysis. He has also occupied editorial positions at several scientific journals and is the author of over 300 peer-reviewed scientific papers.
William van Wijngaarden: Professor van Wijngaarden is a physicist who works at the University of York in Ontario, Canada. As well as researching quantum information and laser spectroscopy, he has published a substantial body of work in climatology, focusing particularly on inhomogeneities in the data records. He has held leadership roles in the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics, the American Physical Society and the Canadian Association of Physicists and is a former chairman of his university's senate.
"Approval ratings go up and down for various reasons... An example is the high post 911 support for GWB even though he could be said to be responsible for the event." --- Box A Rox '9/11 Truther'
Melania is a bimbo... she is there to look at, not to listen to. --- Box A Rox and his 'War on Women'
"Approval ratings go up and down for various reasons... An example is the high post 911 support for GWB even though he could be said to be responsible for the event." --- Box A Rox '9/11 Truther'
Melania is a bimbo... she is there to look at, not to listen to. --- Box A Rox and his 'War on Women'
About Bucky's favorite Climate Change Denier site:
Who funds this group??? No one really knows. They say they are funded by their "membership" but their membership actually funds only 1.6% of their income. The rest comes from "anonymous donors" (Exxon, Mobil, BP etc.? )
Global Warming Policy Foundation data:
Quoted Text
900 papers" claim; subsequent analysis shows Exxon ties, Energy and Environment papers In mid-April 2011, the GWPF provided "900+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism Of "Man-Made" Global Warming (AGW) Alarm".[19] The blog Carbon Brief analyzed them, and found that - 9 of the top 10 authors had ties to ExxonMobil "prominent scientists featured on the list didn't agree that their work supported skepticism about anthropogenic global warming - and had unsuccessfully asked for their work to be removed from similar lists in the past", and the most-cited journal was Energy and Environment, a journal with a very low impact factor whose editors are AGW deniers.
Bucky is quoting this front foundation for 'big oil' as if it actually were a credible source!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
CAMBRIDGE — America’s top military officer in charge of monitoring hostile actions by North Korea, escalating tensions between China and Japan, and a spike in computer attacks traced to China provides an unexpected answer when asked what is the biggest long-term security threat in the Pacific region: Climate Change.
Quoted Text
“The ice is melting and sea is getting higher,” Locklear said, noting that 80 percent of the world’s population lives within 200 miles of the coast. “I’m into the consequence management side of it. I’m not a scientist, but the island of Tarawa in Kiribati, they’re contemplating moving their entire population to another country because [it] is not going to exist anymore.”
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
