Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

About That Global Warming...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    The paper I hate is the Daily Mail.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #62
      In a paper published in the journal Nature this month, scientist point out that in 1610, the dramatic drop in population allowed about 65 million hectares of farmed land in the Americas to return to forest. The growth of so many trees all at once sequestered enough carbon dioxide to cause a measurable difference in the atmosphere. The world momentarily became cooler
      http://www.newsweek.com/did-anthropo...ericans-313319

      So dyson freeman's idea about land management would help with the current co2 levels. Yet no one is talking about that. Instead of wrecking economies, just plant millions of acres of trees for Pete's sake.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #63
        Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

        http://www.newsweek.com/did-anthropo...ericans-313319

        So dyson freeman's idea about land management would help with the current co2 levels. Yet no one is talking about that. Instead of wrecking economies, just plant millions of acres of trees for Pete's sake.

        The purpose of the global warming plot is to redistribute wealth. Planting trees does not accomplish that in the near term.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #64
          Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post


          The purpose of the global warming plot is to redistribute wealth. Planting trees does not accomplish that in the near term.
          That is what some people say. And it does make sense, so I cannot just discount it. Yet if land management, taken on by the same nations who want to tax carbon would pull down co2 levels, which they say is causing climate change(although I personally think it is only one factor of several) then why not push that agenda, for since it would not harm economies as much, it is more likely to be acceptable, even by perhaps china. The continual loss of rain forests could very well be one of the factors that is driving up co2 for heavens sake. Why not use the natural way of reducing co2 levels? Plant more trees, and other plants that pull lots of co2 from the air we breath? Even if we did not produce one molecule of co2, but you started reducing the size of rain forests as we have done, co2 would go up. That is a hard fact. But until this is included in a plan to reduce co2, it makes me think it might be just another way to take the wealth of rich nations, and give it to poor nations. So, there is another agenda involved, a way that can be exploited to do that. And of course that wealth being transferred doesn't come from the rich at all, but the working people.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #65
            The problem I have with the income redistribution idea is that most of the scientists are from the US and Europe so why the hell would they want to cripple the economies of the nations they live in?
            The actions taken to tackle the problem may involve income redistribution but the scientists involved in gathering the pure data would have no input into what governments do.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #66
              Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
              The problem I have with the income redistribution idea is that most of the scientists are from the US and Europe so why the hell would they want to cripple the economies of the nations they live in?
              The actions taken to tackle the problem may involve income redistribution but the scientists involved in gathering the pure data would have no input into what governments do.
              Tackling the problem does not require income redistribution, it requires better technology.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #67
                I think the push to make everything use less power so it's cheaper to run will help quite a lot. Cars have made pretty good progress in the last few decades in regards to fuel efficiency and there are places in the US and now London where there are super strict emission rules that would have been unthinkable even 10 years ago.
                http://www.tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/low-emission-zone

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #68
                  Here's an interesting article about how much China is investing in renewables.

                  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31689722

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                    The problem I have with the income redistribution idea is that most of the scientists are from the US and Europe so why the hell would they want to cripple the economies of the nations they live in?
                    The actions taken to tackle the problem may involve income redistribution but the scientists involved in gathering the pure data would have no input into what governments do.
                    Yeah, the scientists are being given grants, billions of dollars, to research on area of concern. And that area is manmade co2 emissions, and its effects upon climate. The IPCC was only concerned with man made co2 emissions, and didn't want to look in other areas of what causes climate change. They are not even having scientists look to see if the climate would be warming up anyways, regardless of co2. Which by the way one NASA scientist said was happening, as a part of the natural climate cycles of the earth. He then said that co2 produced by the burning of fossil fuels speeded up the warming, but that the warming would occur regardless, and it would eventually warm enough to melt all of the ice at the poles, as in the past. So as he said if you reduced co2 suddenly by 80 percent, the warming would continue on for at least 500 years.

                    Now that means that the carbon tax will not help anything at all, but it will redistribute wealth from working people, the non rich, to other nations who are poorer. So that seems to be what the UN is interested in, not climate change. They are just using climate change to fulfill and agenda, their agenda. And you will not find a poor person in that group, as all are well off people, who will not be affected by the redistribution of the other peoples income. And of course that would explain why land management, which would pull down co2 levels is not even on the damned table.

                    The UN, the IPCC doesn't care about climate change, or really addressing the problem of more c02, that has to be obvious. When one looks at this, it is obvious what they want, and its got little to do with climate change, its about them being able to redistribute income. And as they do that, the climate will continue to warm, which it was doing anyways, because that is what happens when you come out of an ice age. So, its a con game, to push a politically driven agenda. So the politicians can utter the most ludicrous and anti scientific statement....the science is settled. I am sure that sent chills up the legs of real scientists. We are so limited in our knowledge of climate change, yet the politicians and alarmists act as if we actually have a complete understanding. It's absurd, but much worse than that, its anti science.
                    Last edited by Blue Doggy; 03-15-2015, 08:56 AM.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                      The UN, the IPCC doesn't care about climate change, or really addressing the problem of more c02, that has to be obvious.
                      They’ve already admitted it;

                      (NZZ AM SONNTAG): The new thing about your proposal for a Global Deal is the stress on the importance of development policy for climate policy. Until now, many think of aid when they hear development policies.

                      (EDENHOFER): That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there. This will have enormous implications for development policy. And it will raise the question if these countries can deal responsibly with so much money at all.

                      (NZZ): That does not sound anymore like the climate policy that we know.

                      (EDENHOFER): Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet - and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 - there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

                      (NZZ): De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

                      (EDENHOFER): First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.
                      http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/11/18/un-ipcc-official-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-climate-policy

                      Ottmar Edenhofer was one of the authors of the IPCC’s 3rd climate assessment, and was a significant contributor to the 5th (and latest) assessment.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #71
                        I honestly don't know where you get the idea that scientists are getting rich from reporting the facts about the global climate as I know that UK scientists don't get rich as maybe this is different for you guys but our universities or government would be hammered in the press if they gave loads of money to researchers and rightly so in a time of austerity.
                        We just don't have the spare cash to make scientists rich even if we wanted to.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by CYDdharta View Post

                          They’ve already admitted it;


                          http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/11/18/un-ipcc-official-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-climate-policy

                          Ottmar Edenhofer was one of the authors of the IPCC’s 3rd climate assessment, and was a significant contributor to the 5th (and latest) assessment.
                          Well there ya go. It's a con job, and the loony lefties are being played. For if they are average working people, their income is being snatched away and given to others, as freebies. Of course the elites have positioned themselves between us and the poor, so they can dip their huge beaks in the money, for handling charges and such. Just another way for the elites to extract money from us, for themselves, as their hands are not deep enough inside our pockets to satiate their greed.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #73
                            Now according to Mr. Al Gore


                            Climate Change Deniers Should Pay 'a Price' !!!

                            .....
                            "We have this denial industry cranked up constantly," Gore said during his speech Friday. "In addition to 99 percent of the scientists and all the professional scientific organizations, now Mother Nature is weighing in."

                            .....
                            http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/gor.../16/id/630426/


                            Mother nature has been showing us that you are a fool Mr. Gore. But you have no shame.


                            This man continues on with the lie that this man caused global warming nonsense is "accepted science" even though it is anything but that.


                            But if you repeat a lie enough times AND have a media to help you perpetuate it .... soon enough everybody will believe it.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                              I honestly don't know where you get the idea that scientists are getting rich from reporting the facts about the global climate as I know that UK scientists don't get rich as maybe this is different for you guys but our universities or government would be hammered in the press if they gave loads of money to researchers and rightly so in a time of austerity.
                              We just don't have the spare cash to make scientists rich even if we wanted to.
                              The billions given go to the scientists who research within this narrow parameter sir. This is public knowledge and can be found on the net. I read about it there. And it has been billions in grants. But if you wanted a grant, billions of dollars to research other factors in climate change, you will not get it.

                              It started out basically like this. A person who is not a scientist said, man is creating too much co2 and that is the sole cause for global warming. This came from the UN, who wanted to redistribute income, and taxing co2 could be used to do that. So then they convinced gov'ts, to fund, in the billions of dollars, research that proves man is the cause, and to create climate models they could use to show just how horrible man is, and how horrible it will be, unless we tax co2. The fact that it is known that land management could pull down co2 levels, and concentrating on stopping the destruction of rain forests, the lungs of the earth, is not even talked about. For you cannot redistribute income if you used this method of addressing co2.

                              The climate is changing. Man is speeding up a natural change. But taxing co2 will do nothing!! So they are not concerned about anything but using climate change as a way to redistribute income, from the working people. As a few rich elites position themselves to increase their own wealth in the process. LOL

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #75
                                Harvard-Smithsonian Physicist: Computer Models Used by U.N. Overstate Global Warming

                                “Our irreducibly simple climate model does not replace more complex models, but it does expose major errors and exaggeration in those models, such as the over-emphasis on positive or amplifying temperature feedbacks,”
                                http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barb...d-un-overstate

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X