FARK.com: (3251349) Reporters who are skeptical about global warming refused credentials to UN global warming conference

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(News Busters)		Reporters who are skeptical about global warming refused credentials to UN global warming conference (newsbusters.org)		497
		More: Obvious

• • •

5149 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Dec 2007 at 12:22 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/3251349

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

497 Comments (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

Patriotism		2007-12-06 03:19:09 PM

h to the 'ojo: I send my condolences to your pride, although I think we all know that probably died a long time ago.

I'll accept that as your concession speech.
Now can we get back to the whole "barring reporters from reporting" issue that sparked this whole thing?

h to the 'ojo		2007-12-06 03:19:18 PM

politech: h to the 'ojo: politech
It takes no wit to call someone names, so you get a regurgitated quote in turn. "I have been called much worse things by much better people"

It started the name calling ... (was it "insect"? yep that was it) but these Troll 1.0 versions have such limited memory.

I believe that was a remark at your return after having called bullshiat "hard nosed science".

/Forgive him father, for he does not know he sins.

mycatisposter		2007-12-06 03:19:41 PM

Mongo cut wood: Skepticism and objectivity has no place in Real Science.

I lol'd

mycatisposter		2007-12-06 03:20:26 PM

mycatisposter: Mongo cut wood: Skepticism and objectivity has no place in Real Science.

I lol'd

Oh, you were serious. Sorry.

Ambitwistor		2007-12-06 03:20:59 PM

that1guy77:

The earth's ever-changing (yet stable) axis tilt, planetary rotation, sun spots, etc... There are many variables.

Some of those natural factors have cycles, but none of them happen to agree in timing, rate, or magnitude with the recent warming.

h to the 'ojo		2007-12-06 03:21:02 PM

Patriotism: h to the 'ojo: I send my condolences to your pride, although I think we all know that probably died a long time ago.

I'll accept that as your concession speech.
Now can we get back to the whole "barring reporters from reporting" issue that sparked this whole thing?

About 400 posts up it was resolved that these "reporters" had never done any reporting before. As such they were denied press credentials.

/stop persecuting me trolls
//help I'm being oppressed by zee trolls

Flab		2007-12-06 03:21:48 PM

Roman Fyseek: So, if I heat my house, I should worry about my neighbor? You heat your house, don't you? Do you cool it? Did you take the extra time to help your neighbors insulate their houses? Or do you take it on faith that everybody in your neighborhood does the best that they can with the limited resources they have available?

I live in a new neighborhood. The oldest house is 14 months old. All built following the 2005 national building code. I don't really have to worry about my immediate neighbors' lack of insulation. I have also recently finished helping my inlaws redo the insulation in their attic, and I don't have air conditioning.

However, the foot of snow we got on monday and the two-fold increase in the number of people on the subway leads be to believe that most of my neighbors do not carpool and as a matter of fact, my wife and i were discussing registering with a car-pool organisms in our area.

You were saying?

fatal_exception		2007-12-06 03:21:58 PM

danielsangeo: I don't think you know the meaning of the word "science". Science is the methodological research, testing, observation of phenomenon and refinement of predictions.

By the way, Humans are NOT destroying the planet. Humans are, however, destroying the environment that WE need to survive in.

/Enjoys breathing clean air.

FWIW, Science is the pursuit of methodological research, testing, observation of phenomenon and refinement of predictions. It is still subject to fraud, mistakes and social influence.

And I too have a vested interest in a healthy environment.

BTW, I'm not attacking anything you've said because I honestly haven't read the whole thread. I just felt it was important to point out that healthy skepticism of science is good too.

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:22:23 PM

I hear they didn't give Fred Phelps a pass to attend the latest conference on evolutionary biology either.

Those doctors and their "PhD's" must have something to hide.

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:23:49 PM

The_Gallant_Gallstone: Do you think the same thing about Fox News?

Nope. I think Fox is the only MSM that's actually biased to the right. I feel that *all* the others are heavily biased to the left.

But, I'll bet that you think MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CNN are all right-wing mouthpieces.

h to the 'ojo		2007-12-06 03:24:44 PM

Poopspasm: I hear they didn't give Fred Phelps a pass to attend the latest conference on evolutionary biology either.

Those doctors and their "PhD's" must have something to hide.

PhD stands for Pretty huge Dick

/BEng, PEng, MBA, PhD, SoB, BSc

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:24:51 PM

Roman Fyseek: But, I'll bet that you think MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CNN are all right-wing mouthpieces.

No, they're biased towards the center.

Ambitwistor		2007-12-06 03:24:51 PM

fatal_exception:

Am I correct in reading that over the span of 120 years we are talking about an anomolous surface temperature change from peak to trough of 1 degree? Also that from 1915 to 1945 the maximum fluctuation is 0.6 degrees and that the period from 1980 to the present indicates a maximum of 0.55 degree variation?

That's about right, yes.

I have to admit I'm not entirely sure what that chart is trying to say but if I'm interpreting it correctly (don't know, that's why I'm asking) it suggests to me that there is essentially minimal change in the mean surface temperature over the past century

A 1 degree change in one century is not that minimal. But it's not really the warming we've already experienced that people are concerned about. It's about the possibility of additional 2-5 degrees on top of that during this century.

and that the last twenty year variation has been seen before which was followed by a 35 year period of normalization.

If you're asking about the cooling period which followed the early 20th century warming, that is attributed to the cooling effects of atmospheric aerosols (air pollution, really). Past midcentury, aerosol emissions slowed while CO2 emissions accelerated, until the latter outweighed the former.

Patriotism		2007-12-06 03:25:10 PM

h to the 'ojo: /stop persecuting me trolls
//help I'm being oppressed by zee trolls

Oh that's precious. The last refuge of a whipped lib: cry discrimination.

"Oh noes, the trolls are trolling me! Trolly troll trolltastic!"

Grow up and try addressing reality. Yes, reality can sting, especially when it doesn't agree with your slanted world view, but it's still there, and it isn't going anywhere any time soon.

that1guy77		2007-12-06 03:25:14 PM

Ambitwistor: that1guy77:

The earth's ever-changing (yet stable) axis tilt, planetary rotation, sun spots, etc... There are many variables.

Some of those natural factors have cycles, but none of them happen to agree in timing, rate, or magnitude with the recent warming.

Key word: recent. The last year, decade and even century are less than one drop in the bucket when you take the bigger picture of climate history the last, oh I dunno... several thousands of years into context. It's a cyclical trend and all the ups and downs have their unique and random signature patterns.

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:25:24 PM

0100010: Everybody that wants to attend isn't going to be able to. Media get restricted because of this all the time. There's always going to be the need for a certain level of restriction/security in a big event.

Tell code-pink that "There's always going to be the need for a certain level of restriction/security in a big event."

mycatisposter		2007-12-06 03:26:23 PM

Poopspasm: Roman Fyseek: But, I'll bet that you think MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CNN are all right-wing mouthpieces.

No, they're biased towards the center.

I lol'd.
Oh. You are serious, too. Dammit!!

h to the 'ojo		2007-12-06 03:27:48 PM

Roman Fyseek: The_Gallant_Gallstone: Do you think the same thing about Fox News?

Nope. I think Fox is the only MSM that's actually biased to the right. I feel that *all* the others are heavily biased to the left.

But, I'll bet that you think MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CNN are all right-wing mouthpieces.

Choosing between them would be like shopping for groceries in the rubbish bin. I think a person's knowledge of current events is more relevant than being a loyal viewer to a news program. If you must pick a sole American source, at least pick PBS

LouDobbsAwaaaay		2007-12-06 03:27:56 PM

What I'm getting from conservatives is that any idiot who wants to push an agenda should be able to attend anything at any time so long as they call themselves a "reporter".

Ambitwistor		2007-12-06 03:28:56 PM

that1guy77:

Key word: recent.

Indeed.

The last year, decade and even century are less than one drop in the bucket when you take the bigger picture of climate history the last, oh I dunno... several thousands of years into context.

They are highly relevant when it comes to what's going to happen in the next year, decade, and century.

It's a cyclical trend and all the ups and downs have their unique and random signature patterns.

The whole point is that the recent warming does NOT follow natural "cyclical trends", and in fact is to some extent opposed to them.

politech		2007-12-06 03:28:57 PM

h to the 'ojo:
/Forgive him father, for he does not know he sins
/stop persecuting me trolls
//help I'm being oppressed by zee trolls

By your last couple of comments it becomes clear that you are a "Mother Earth" Worshiping religious zealot, and as such there is no hope of participating in any reasonable discussion with you regarding this topic.

www.coxandforkum.com

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:29:13 PM

mycatisposter: I lol'd.
Oh. You are serious, too. Dammit!!

Please tell me how they're biased towards the hard left. Show your work.

Defleshed		2007-12-06 03:29:14 PM

I'm at work in downtown Chicago right now and I just came back from getting some lunch which means I had to go outside. I demand to know where my global warming is, because it is motherfarking COLD here.

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:29:23 PM

Flab: However, the foot of snow we got on monday and the two-fold increase in the number of people on the subway leads be to believe that most of my neighbors do not carpool and as a matter of fact, my wife and i were discussing registering with a car-pool organisms in our area.

You were saying?

That apparently you don't represent the rest of the left. The rest of the left points and laughs at you. Get an escalade like everybody else. Don't you have any money?

Or would you rather I say, "Wow. Apparently, you and the conservative are on exactly the same path."

Mr_Fabulous		2007-12-06 03:30:27 PM

JDAT: So have we survived that "ice age" that scientists said we we were heading into back in the 70's?

I know that I, personally, have disabused you of that notion in a previous thread, long ago. And yet, here you are again, repeating the same giddy lie again.

Why is that?

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:30:30 PM

h to the 'ojo		2007-12-06 03:30:37 PM

Patriotism: h to the 'ojo: /stop persecuting me trolls
//help I'm being oppressed by zee trolls

Oh that's precious. The last refuge of a whipped lib: cry discrimination.

"Oh noes, the trolls are trolling me! Trolly troll trolltastic!"

Grow up and try addressing reality. Yes, reality can sting, especially when it doesn't agree with your slanted world view, but it's still there, and it isn't going anywhere any time soon.

Awww, build 'me' up some more buttercup. A few more posts like that and you can really knock 'me' down hard. It's so cute that you choose a sarcastic joke to open up a new front.

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:30:59 PM

Poopspasm: No, they're biased towards the center.

I think you just proved one of my points, then. You're not paying attention.

Ask Dan Rather. Ask the YouTube debate clowns.

fatal_exception		2007-12-06 03:31:12 PM

Ambitwistor

Thank you.

If you're asking about the cooling period which followed the early 20th century warming, that is attributed to the cooling effects of atmospheric aerosols (air pollution, really). Past midcentury, aerosol emissions slowed while CO2 emissions accelerated, until the latter outweighed the former.

Yes, that's the time frame I was looking at. Interesting that you say it has been attributed to aerosols. I've always held that the extensive above-ground nuclear testing that coincidentally ocurred during that timeline must have had a significant atmospheric and environmental impact. Although you're suggesting other factors are being held accountable this is in fact the first graphical evidence I've ever come across that at least in some way validates my thoughts.

Again thanks. It's a nice change to get a genuine reply to a genuine question here.

papabusche		2007-12-06 03:31:54 PM

Patriotism: Alphax: Now I'm REALLY laughing hard!

I'm not surprised.

Put the ~~bong~~ PBR down for a few minutes, turn down the ~~Dylan~~ Nugent CD for a second, and take a look around.
Maybe you'll see that life outside ~~commune~~ Church isn't quite as cut-and-dried as ~~John Stuart~~ Limbaugh wants you to think it is.
You're being used my friend, and unless you sort out some pretty important issues, you always will be.

FTFY

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:32:01 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: What I'm getting from conservatives is that any idiot who wants to push an agenda should be able to attend anything at any time so long as they call themselves a "reporter".

Please stuff a code-pinker up your ass.

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:32:15 PM

Mr_Fabulous: I know that I, personally, have disabused you of that notion in a previous thread, long ago. And yet, here you are again, repeating the same giddy lie again.

Why is that?

Because lies and desperation are all the deniers have left.

It's science people. Shouldn't you be burning books or suing to get creationism taught in schools?

that1guy77		2007-12-06 03:32:59 PM

Ambitwistor: that1guy77:

Key word: recent.

Indeed.

The last year, decade and even century are less than one drop in the bucket when you take the bigger picture of climate history the last, oh I dunno... several thousands of years into context.

They are highly relevant when it comes to what's going to happen in the next year, decade, and century.

It's a cyclical trend and all the ups and downs have their unique and random signature patterns.

The whole point is that the recent warming does NOT follow natural "cyclical trends", and in fact is to some extent opposed to them.

Exactly, because it's too small of a time frame.

Now give me your hard earned money for carbon credits because of all the exhaling you've done.

LouDobbsAwaaaay		2007-12-06 03:33:16 PM

Roman Fyseek: Please stuff a code-pinker up your ass.

No.

Any more pointless requests?

0100010		2007-12-06 03:33:44 PM

Roman Fyseek: 0100010: Everybody that wants to attend isn't going to be able to. Media get restricted because of this all the time. There's always going to be the need for a certain level of restriction/security in a big event.

Tell code-pink that "There's always going to be the need for a certain level of restriction/security in a big event."

And your point is...? Is this some sort of left vs right comment that one side's just as bad as the other? Please, explain.

/seem to have lost my membership cards
//anyone want to remind me who I'm registered with?

ranold		2007-12-06 03:34:02 PM

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:34:30 PM

Defleshed: I'm at work in downtown Chicago right now and I just came back from getting some lunch which means I had to go outside. I demand to know where my global warming is, because it is motherfarking COLD here.

They changed it to global climate change. Apparently, they couldn't afford blankets what with all the social programs. Turns out that without heat they had to can 'global warming'. I keep getting told that somebody coined the phrase back in '98, so all these libs are just raking Al Gore over the coals. Apparently, the planet *doesn't* have a fever.

/whatever.

h to the 'ojo		2007-12-06 03:35:15 PM

politech: h to the 'ojo:
/Forgive him father, for he does not know he sins
/stop persecuting me trolls
//help I'm being oppressed by zee trolls

By your last couple of comments it becomes clear that you are a "Mother Earth" Worshiping religious zealot, and as such there is no hope of participating in any reasonable discussion with you regarding this topic.

I see you even have to copy pasta an argument that attacks 'the man' when you cannot dispute 'the idea'. I wonder if I'm the only one to pick up on the irony that scientists have historically been jailed and worse for speaking an independent truth that did not follow the church's teachings. That is unless you still believe the earth is flat and Galileo was a liar in which case that comic will hold no irony for you.

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:36:41 PM

Roman Fyseek: I think you just proved one of my points, then. You're not paying attention.

Ask Dan Rather. Ask the YouTube debate clowns.

Dan Rather made a false report and was fired for his trouble. CNN failed to perform background checks on audience members.

You're right, it must be a vast left-wing conspiracy.

Meanwhile, FOX brings you gems like this:

www.whiterose.org

No one was fired. No admission of guilt. No corrective action.

CNN, et al fail to give the right its due when they're correct. They similiarly fail to give the left their due when they turn out to be correct. They court the center to reatin as much popularity as possible, but they're losing as our country becomes more and more fragmented.

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:36:43 PM

0100010: Tell code-pink that "There's always going to be the need for a certain level of restriction/security in a big event."

And your point is...? Is this some sort of left vs right comment that one side's just as bad as the other? Please, explain.

That everytime those biatches get thrown out of congress, there's always some Cindy Sheehan/Cynthia McKinney ready to scream "We're being oppressed! Come see the oppression inherent in the machine!"

Sorta like these skeptical reporters (see the topic for a reminder)

Sir Roderick Glossop		2007-12-06 03:38:36 PM

Farking Canuck: Sir Roderick Glossop: I know that Europe etc. signed onto the Kyoto protocol. However, I didn't think that any of them had actually started to enact the reductions required of them by the protocol.

They seem to be talking the talk but not walking the walk. Now Bush is talking the talk, but I dobut we'll see any action from him either.

Kyoto is flawed ... I doubt any nations will really be able to step up completely to it.

This does not mean that these nations will not work to reduce emissions and fossil fuel dependencies.

Like I said ... unlike the US, the arguments are "how do we proceed" not "should we do anything?".

Problem is, their behavior can also be considered a grand but empty gesture. "Oh, this is a problem! Let's form a committee with several subcommittees and we'll get right on this!" Years later, they've done....nothing, right?

Their behavior doesn't match their verbal behavior. See, now that Bush has said it's a problem we're up to speed. And not even a millimeter behind the rest of you in reducing carbon emissions. Eurpoe is better at placating their masses by saying "yes" then acting "no."

Totalitaryan		2007-12-06 03:38:54 PM

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:39:04 PM

Roman Fyseek: reporters

You keep using that word....

mycatisposter		2007-12-06 03:39:15 PM

Poopspasm: mycatisposter: I lol'd.
Oh. You are serious, too. Dammit!!

Please tell me how they're biased towards the hard left. Show your work.

Not MY work, but UCLA is hardly conservative"
Media Bias (new window)

Roman Fyseek		2007-12-06 03:39:16 PM

Poopspasm: Dan Rather made a false report and was fired for his trouble. CNN failed to perform background checks on audience members.

Try again. Dan Rather made a false report, was discovered, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, and was finally fired.

Look at it this way: The MSM's job is to remain the MSM. Just like politicians' jobs are to remain politicians. Facts mean nothing to the MSM. Ratings mean everything. Facts mean nothing to politicians. Elections mean everything.

slave2grind		2007-12-06 03:40:39 PM

Mankind induced/enhanced global climate change...

..har har har-dee har har.

It seems almost like when marijuana was criminalized. Alot of closed door meetings, a consensus of some scientists, and some kooks to go along with the idea that we need protection from this impending doom. Lets not forget very questionable (and ultimately dead wrong) evidence to support the whole thing.

Ambitwistor		2007-12-06 03:41:35 PM

fatal_exception:

I've always held that the extensive above-ground nuclear testing that coincidentally ocurred during that timeline must have had a significant atmospheric and environmental impact.

I've heard that suggested before, but there has been climate research on "nuclear winter", and the dust and soot put into the air from nuclear tests just doesn't compare to the cooling strength of industrial aerosol emissions. With a larger nuclear exchange focused on cities where a lot of burning would happen, then you can get significant climate effects.

Poopspasm		2007-12-06 03:42:10 PM

Roman Fyseek: Try again. Dan Rather made a false report, was discovered, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, and was finally fired.

That doesn't even make sense. He was still fired for giving a false report. That's really all that matters if you're trying to imply that the untruth was given an endorsement from the station (which would constitute bias).

h to the 'ojo		2007-12-06 03:42:43 PM

Roman Fyseek: Poopspasm: Dan Rather made a false report and was fired for his trouble. CNN failed to perform background checks on audience members.

Try again. Dan Rather made a false report, was discovered, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, refused to say that it was false, and was finally fired.

Look at it this way: The MSM's job is to remain the MSM. Just like politicians' jobs are to remain politicians. Facts mean nothing to the MSM. Ratings mean everything. Facts mean nothing to politicians. Elections mean everything.

Solution: New media outlets, new political parties. With increased concentration in major American media both news and politics have turned to shiat.

Of course I have no easy answer on how to accomplish either of those as most people are only too happy to remain loyal followers.