The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [9]  |  Archives [1] 
 
User: Guest

News  100% width237 postspage 1 of 8

Poland blocks any action on climate change


berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #1
en.avaaz.org/1163/and-the-worlds-new-climate-president-is

Poland blocked combined European efforts to take stricter climate actions until 2020 for the third time.
They have done everything to be the bad guy in the EU, yet they wanna host the next talks?
Its hard to top a climate summit hosted in Qatar, but they might actually pull it off.
Grzegorz_ 52 | 6,181    
6 Dec 2012  #2
One of few things this gov is right on.

the government is out of touch with its own citizens who are concerned about climate change and support clean energy.

Too funny.
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #3
Are you saying that the majority doesnt care?
Grzegorz_ 52 | 6,181    
6 Dec 2012  #4
You mean about this CO2 madness ?
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #5
You made that comment, how should i know what you meant?
What did you mean by?

Too funny.

gumishu 11 | 4,850    
6 Dec 2012  #6
Bernie you must be CO2-is-creating-global-warming believer. We are not.
JimmyH 1 | 21    
6 Dec 2012  #7
Ah yes, backwards Catholic Poland rejecting science again.
kondzior 8 | 931    
6 Dec 2012  #8
Anyone remember this?
guardian/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-hackers-leaked-emails

CO2 creating a "climate change" is proven to be fraud.

The IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) predicted an almost total melting of the Himalayan glaciers for the year 2035. Well, turns out they got the date wrong by roughly 300 years

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8387737.stm

timesofindia.indiatimes/home/environment/global-warming/IPCC-did-not-consult-me-relied-on-press-interview-Hasnain/articleshow/5477806.cms

The IPCC findings were based on Hasnain's interview to "New Scientist" magazine in 1999 which were used by Murari Lal who had edited the chapter on glaciers for the IPCC report.

Lal claimed Hasnain had "misled" the entire scientific community by making the claims and IPCC had relied on his remarks made in the interview "in good faith"

"I do not understand why they picked only the interview I had given to New Scientist. I have not mentioned the year 2035 in any of the research papers written by me" Hasnain said.

Lol. "New Scientist" 'popular science magazine' (sold in newsagents, kiosks) is now a peer-review level source? IPCC 'researchers' would have failed 1st year at any college with standards.

You know, just for once I'd like those warmthinker types provide a scientific provable fact to base their theory on.

Just when I think those Himalayan melting glaciers can serve as, not quite, visible proof for global warming, they had to go and post the facts wrong.

It make me think quite seriously that there's a conspiracy on this warming nonsense. Not yet, but it's a start.
JimmyH 1 | 21    
6 Dec 2012  #9
CO2 creating a "climate change" is proven to be fraud.

No, it's not. I see you failed science class in school.
kondzior 8 | 931    
6 Dec 2012  #10
Except the entire thing is a straw man.

Anybody who was paying attention during their first hour of Earth Sciences 101 would know that nobody has ever claimed that CO2 is what controls heat dissipation from the earth's surface. NOBODY. EVER.

It's always been water vapor in the atmosphere accorded this role going back to the weather science that was current in the late 1800's.

The entire thing is a decoy argument built around a fundamental misconception.

Asking what the role is of CO2 in controlling the earth's heat is like asking somebody when they stopped beating their wife. Who said that person beats their wife? Where did you get that wild assumption from to begin with?

You guys fake it real good. You would never fool anybody who was not a poseur, however. Never. But you do sound reel intelejent and whatnot and what have you.
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #11
So what is behind this evil scam?
Jews? Foreigners? Santa Claus?
Harry    
6 Dec 2012  #12
Er, you do know that Santa Claus is a foreign Jew, don't you?
kondzior 8 | 931    
6 Dec 2012  #13
Did you guys even bother to read these e-mails? The whole story - coupled with the rather poor RC rebuttal: realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/

smells bad, to say at least. Quite a few of emails I've read makes these scientists' 'authority figure' status most questionable.
They mention tampering data and other stuff that raises serious doubts.

Get the file off the torrents: mininova.org/tor/3168330
jon357 65 | 13,654    
6 Dec 2012  #14
There are no serious doubts about man-made climate change. It's effects are measurable and progressive.
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #15
You still fail to answer why the whole scientific community is meeting to debate this, while some tin-foil-heads cook up conspiracy theories in their moms basement.

And BTW: "Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientists"
claim != true
kondzior 8 | 931    
6 Dec 2012  #16
@jon357 If there is no doubt, why the need to cook the evidence?

@Berni23 Uh, realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/

I post this one again. If anyone should be announcing that the emails have been tampered with, it's the source of them. They aren't claiming such a thing. Also

nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html

So, will you finally relate to the material itself instead of calling it crap? It seems that you're the guy with a tinfoil hat. I didn't bother to consider these emails relevant until I've done some research - yet you consider yourself authorised to dismiss them altogether based on stuff that you pull out of your arse.

PS1: Arse is not a good source of anything else than sh!t.

PS2: To make things clear, in the RC link I mean the official statement that's posted there.
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #17
So its the whole scientific community?
They frecked up and now they are trying to cover their tracks?
gumishu 11 | 4,850    
6 Dec 2012  #18
There are no serious doubts about man-made climate change. It's effects are measurable and progressive.

there are serious doubts unless you are a CO2-creates-global-warming believer and you most definitely are
TheOther 5 | 3,589    
6 Dec 2012  #19
You people will still deny the climate change when your house is under water... :)
kondzior 8 | 931    
6 Dec 2012  #20
So its the whole scientific community? They frecked up and now they are trying to cover their tracks?

Were you not aware that scientists often fluff up their research to gain more funding? What's more, a lot of them don't do it for funding but because they wish to prove themselves right. Everyone wants to be right, but if you manipulate facts to prove something then you're not a scientist.

Scientific community is a group just like any other. This means it is prone to many flaws. The problem is that allowing such flaws to grow in science makes the whole purpose of science null and void. Leave it that way and you'll be able to switch the word 'popular theory' to 'dogma'.

This emails should be extensively investigated with the possible punishment given to those involved. Yes, because of the lack of ethics. Striking a deal with someone to censor differing opinions out from his popular blog - to make your work look more appealing - is something that science should be ideally free of.
gumishu 11 | 4,850    
6 Dec 2012  #21
You people will still deny the climate change when your house is under water... :)

the other, I;m not denying climate change, I am merely stating that there is no good proof CO2 levels are contributing to this

c3headlines.com/natural-negativepositive-feedback
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #22
A lot has been interpreted into those emails, and i agree if somebody was guilty of falsifying data he should have been held responsible for it.

I am also sure that they were, they lost creditability, which fortunately counts for a lot in science.

But what about the thousands of scientists that agree on that matter and of whom no private email were published?
Are they all liars, too?
Are they manipulated by some interest group?
Or are they simply wrong?
Richfilth 6 | 415    
6 Dec 2012  #23
I don't really see how outright misogyny works as anything except an argument against you, kondzior. Got any credible sources to back up your outrageous claims?
kondzior 8 | 931    
6 Dec 2012  #24
I am not starting in popularity contest. And deleting post wih perfectly reasonable opinions works against you.
TheOther 5 | 3,589    
6 Dec 2012  #25
I;m not denying climate change, I am merely stating that there is no good proof CO2 levels are contributing to this

Climate change caused by humans: true or false - does it really matter? If you look at the pollution levels all around the world it seems obvious to me that we need to start changing our habits soon. Otherwise we will kill the planet. Especially if China and India continue to develop at a fast pace while repeating all the mistakes the west made in the past.
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #26
And what about thousands who disagree?

You mean thousands of scientists? Like here:

"The 2001 joint statement was signed by the national academies of science of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, the People's Republic of China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the UK. The 2005 statement added Japan, Russia, and the U.S. The 2007 statement added Mexico and South Africa. The Network of African Science Academies, and the Polish Academy of Sciences have issued separate statements. Professional scientific societies include American Astronomical Society, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Institute of Physics, American Meteorological Society, American Physical Society, American Quaternary Association, Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society [...]"

nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf

given the revelations contained in these emails

Yeah man, thx for opening my eyes.

Below that the usual insults culminating in the usual racist climax, although i have to give you credit for the misogynistic touch, thats new. *clap* *clap*

Sorry mate, no time for that.
kondzior 8 | 931    
6 Dec 2012  #27
The scientific consensus towards Global warming, while being larger than the sceptic science against GW today, is still insignificant.

Before this, there was a global food shortage scare as well, along with energy scares around the same time

I haven't seen a scare campaign that has garnered this much scientific consensus, but this in no way should stop science from testing every angle of it at every opportunity. I know the whole thing is another load of rubbish like previous scares.
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #28
Before this, there was a global food shortage scare as well, along with energy scares around the same time

You mean they are not real?
Than you are in for a real treat.
gumishu 11 | 4,850    
6 Dec 2012  #29
Berni why don't you discuss with me instead of kondzior
OP berni23 7 | 384    
6 Dec 2012  #30
You dont post enough BS. ;)



Home / News / Poland blocks any action on climate change
Bold Italic [quote]

 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary and unique username or login and post as a member.