The New York Times’ idiotic editorial demanding action because of faulty claims of global warming.
This week the editorial board demanded that Obama should live up to his SOTU speech and part the seas and stop global warming. I was planning on writing this week about Agenda 21 and its 1992 proposals for storm water. Let’s see what we can do here with the 2 concepts.
First off the Times’ loons bought the story that they published earlier that : “Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, the most important global warming gas, have hit 400 parts per million for the first time in millions of years.”
This is a stupid statement to say the least. Why not say you have derived readings that are higher than they were in the last 50 years. To say a million years makes it sound like you can’t win the argument so like Jay Carney just make up a baseless and fact less statement. We don’t know what the CO2 content was a million years ago and who cares. The Times seems to care. Then if they were serious they would close down the paper. Save the trees and get the people out of the building and save all those fossil fuel depositions to warm and cool the Times workers. But like Obama and algore, they waste and pollute the atmosphere with CO2 and they tell everyone else not to do it.
My premise is simple. Most of these problems created by global warming and please note that the term global warming was supposed to be replaced by climate change. Since we are in a cooling period, we can only conclude as scientists that the CO2 problem is solved. Let’s blame President Bush for that one!
Let’s identify what a science is and what a scientist is supposed to be doing. When guys like Obama use the term science, what they mean is it is gospel truth and you must believe it. That premise can’t be any further from the truth. I am technically a scientist because I have a BS. Degree in Chemistry. But I think you folks are being fed a lot of BS from our liberal media and politicians. You should ask Why. Been there done that.
So the way that science is supposed to work is someone makes a hypothesis. Let’s make a hypothesis that the earth is warming because of the activities of man and woman and the indigenous or did they mean indigent. So a scientist runs a bunch of experiments. And he collects his salary from liberal groups and political groups that will make a ton of money if we buy into global warming.
The way this is supposed to work is that once the experiment is completed and documented, then the results need to be duplicated by other non-tainted scientists. And to focus on C02 as the only source raises some valid questions. And since the earth is no longer warming, then how do we switch the emphasis from global warming to flooding, storms etc. It doesn’t fit the original scientific hypothesis. The scientists need to go back to the drawing board and create a new hypothesis. If not they are not scientists. They have no scientific theory and they are just political hacks.
For many years since I am a storm water expert and have major concerns and see storm water fatalities, I hypothesize that most symptoms that these loons equate to global warming can be attributed to faulty storm water management. And you can ask any storm water expert, and most if not all countries are dumping more storm water into their watercourses, seas and oceans then ever before.
If you look at the Agenda 21 bible page 146 it gets interesting. The bible uses both terms global warming and climate change. but the bible refers to coastal areas and discusses some problems that include: poor land-use practices, over-fertilization, pest control, poor watershed management and clearing of forests on steep lands.
Well guess what folks in 1992 they were actually pointing to storm water as the problem and not CO2. They admitted that they didn’t have the data to support CO2 issues but here on page 146 we see storm water issues. So someone has to make up their minds… Is it CO2 or faulty storm water management?
So as scientists you need to go back to the drawing board and see what affects CO2 and what affects storm water rates and flows have on the environment. And it would be pretty easy to conclude that if we have greater storm water flow, why wouldn’t we have more flooding and changes in our weather patterns.
So basically the 5 things listed by the 1992 Agenda 21 bible refers to things happening that results in land erosion. This flooding etc. causes the fertilizers and pest control along with all other crap (like in NYC) to flow into the oceans.
As tenderfoot scientists, we can now walk about the cabin and discuss intelligently not politically how we can reduce storm water mismanagement. And in most cases it is physically reversible. The loons want to take away your freedoms for the next century and there is no proof that the atmospheric CO2 will drop a smidgen.
They have no proof but why not jump in and take away your energy sources and prosperity!That seems logical, doesn’t it?
So the NY Times better demand that Obama hire some real scientists. Scientists that are not bribed and encourage to make false conclusions. After all money is money. We can fix storm water, we can never fix CO2 no matter how hard the liberal loons imagine otherwise.
A quick note, the issue about escaping methane was found to be untrue. Again the Times should hire unbiased and respectable scientists that are not being paid to pad their results. If you want to create sound scientific theory you need reputable and reproducible results. If the Times wants to quote what Obama said in his SOTU, they might want to think otherwise.
Obama lied about ObamaCare, Benghazi, and he was taking a nap when the IRS was told to go after certain groups and have his appointees listen in on the AP.
If you lie everyday of your life, there comes a day when you have to pay the piper! Has the day arrived for Obama and his cohorts! They blame climate change on just about anything. They blame it on the diminishing of frogs and bees. They blame it on tornados. If only they have facts and scientific theory to prove their unfounded theories.
I can prove any day of the week that storm water has increased. It increases everyday. As the erosion takes place, the flow of water becomes more abundant and usually faster. I can show you storm water fatalities right here in Pennsylvania. Can you show me actual CO2 related fatalities! The hole in the Ozone was supposed to cause all sorts of problems. They were wrong again. Will the true and honest scientists please stand up! And please prove to these liberal wackos at the Times that they should write about stuff that can be proven by scientific data and not by political imaginations. Cap and trade and Agenda 21 are taxes to create money to send and redistribute to developing countries to help the environment and poor people. Again it has nothing to do with provable CO2 scientific theories! Bring on the real scientists, Please!