Climate change

[Skids]

^

Did you read the article?

As if!.. they just buy the crap the mainstream media feed them. Any alternate arguement is ignored, belittled and dismissed.... it's their way.

[Woods]

(Checked to see if this interview has been posted earlier but couldn’t find anything)

So, an interview (less than 15 mins) with Dr Patrick Michaels, Director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute on the reality, or not, of a climate change crisis.

I’ve mentioned previously why mainstream climate change research is not science at all, but mere technologists manipulating data in computer models to come up with preconceived outcomes. Not science but fraud. Don’t be duped.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA5sGtj7QKQ

Listen and learn.

(And David, you might be alarmed to find that the only computer model that has predictive veracity is the Russian one. Propaganda and conspiracy from those damned Putinists again!)

[David]

[Pies4shaw]

Patrick Michaels is completely compromised. He has openly admitted that his research is (at least) 40% funded by the oil indutsry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fguJod_voPc

This is not recent - by 2005 he had "received more than $165,000 in fuel-industry funding, including money from the coal industry to publish his own climate journal." - https://web.archive.org/web/20070425173 ... arm11.html

As to the quality of that which passes for his science, see: https://skepticalscience.com/patrick-mi ... wrong.html

[Skids]

Patrick Michaels is completely compromised. He has openly admitted that his research is (at least) 40% funded by the oil indutsry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fguJod_voPc

This is not recent - by 2005 he had "received more than $165,000 in fuel-industry funding, including money from the coal industry to publish his own climate journal." - https://web.archive.org/web/20070425173 ... arm11.html

As to the quality of that which passes for his science, see: https://skepticalscience.com/patrick-mi ... wrong.html

And the climate alarmists are funded by who?

The argument of who funds what works both ways, well, in the real world anyway... obviously not, in your bubble.

The hysteria that is shown into everyones lounge room, every night, on the news is ridiculous. Have they mentioned once, that there are over 50,000 bushfires a year in Australia... have they mentioned people being fined for making fire breaks too wide, or others removing bush fire fuel from areas they once could, not being allowed to anymore... no!
They highlight sensation seeking items... it's a fckn disgrace and it needs to be more balanced. Stop trying to scare the shit out of everyone with things that have been happening since Adam was a boy!

[Pies4shaw]

Who are the "climate alarmists" of whom you speak? There are scientists who publish their findings - and occasionally feel the need to add 12,000 or 15,000 signatures to letters that they think are necessary to send to governments or the United Nations to try to get people to take their research seriously. Then there are people who, for a variety of reasons, take a simplistic approach to the matters in issue. As, eg, some climate change activists and you.

[stui magpie]

I've been to Port Douglas heaps of times, snorkeled every time and speak to the people up there. I get email alerts from the Port Douglas news.

I didn't seek out a link to prove a point, I got the article read it and shared it. I guess you won't see it in the Guardian any time soon though, it doesn't comply with their agenda.

Have you ever snorkeled the reef?

Funny, all and I mean every local including boat tour operators were lamenting how bad it is now (coral, the reef etc) when I was in Port Douglas last year (September 2018)

If you bothered to actually read the article, it refers to the bleaching events of 2016/17 and says this is the best spawning in years.

I'm sure you managed to speak to every local and tour operator in town, no exaggeration whatsoever.

I was last there in late 2017, the low iles reef was a mess after the recent cyclone (obviously caused by climate change) but there were clear signs of the reef regenerating.

Anyone really interested in Coral should get up to Darwin and see the bloke at Indo Pacific marine. He has a mini ecosystem in something slightly larger than a billiard table with living coral. No filtration system, you can't grow coral in an aquarium.

[watt price tully]

I've been to Port Douglas heaps of times, snorkeled every time and speak to the people up there. I get email alerts from the Port Douglas news.

I didn't seek out a link to prove a point, I got the article read it and shared it. I guess you won't see it in the Guardian any time soon though, it doesn't comply with their agenda.

Have you ever snorkeled the reef?

Funny, all and I mean every local including boat tour operators were lamenting how bad it is now (coral, the reef etc) when I was in Port Douglas last year (September 2018)

If you bothered to actually read the article, it refers to the bleaching events of 2016/17 and says this is the best spawning in years.

I'm sure you managed to speak to every local and tour operator in town, no exaggeration whatsoever.

I was last there in late 2017, the low iles reef was a mess after the recent cyclone (obviously caused by climate change) but there were clear signs of the reef regenerating.

Anyone really interested in Coral should get up to Darwin and see the bloke at Indo Pacific marine. He has a mini ecosystem in something slightly larger than a billiard table with living coral. No filtration system, you can't grow coral in an aquarium.

Settle petal

I omitted to say “that I came across”. Climate change as you’ve noted before sets the context for these extreme weather events to occur. As you know there isn’t anything remarkable about that.

[watt price tully]

Industry groups cherry picking data on the Great Barrier Reef. Those saying it is healthy are using tobacco industry tactics when they denied any link / cause of smoking tobacco and lung cancer

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... f-research

[stui magpie]

I didn't bother reading it. The Guardian has put it's climate change agenda out and proud. You're as likely to find anything balanced on climate change there as you are going to find anything balanced on Trump on Fox

[watt price tully]

I didn't bother reading it. The Guardian has put it's climate change agenda out and proud. You're as likely to find anything balanced on climate change there as you are going to find anything balanced on Trump on Fox

The Guardian here is reporting not providing commentary: an important and basic distinction.

If you were talking about an opinion or commentary you might have a point

[stui magpie]

You still believe there's a distinction. How quaint.

[stui magpie]

Food for thought

https://www.facebook.com/chris.dynon?__ ... Xc&fref=nf

[Pies4shaw]

Link broken?

[stui magpie]

https://www.facebook.com/chris.dynon/vi ... Xc&fref=nf

Try that.

or this https://www.facebook.com/chris.dynon/vi ... 351231927/