Why blame the mid 1970’s surface cooling on aerosols when you can see that La Nina and a cold AMO were dominating it, and you should also know that La Nina and a cold AMO will make continental interiors wetter and cool them too.
Your main problem is that La Nina and a cold AMO are directly associated with increased positive NAO/AO, and so is increased CO2 forcing.
Spot the contradiction?
Comment on The uncertainty of climate sensitivity and its implication for the Paris negotiations by ulriclyons
↧
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Willard
> You said that corporations were given the same rights as freed slaves.
Come on, Don Don. By “same rights” I was alluding to citizenship and equal protection under the law. What is implied by these rights varied in time and according to the specific nature of the citizenship. Ask your Porto Rican friends if you share exactly the same specific rights because you’re both natural persons.
Here’s the first sentence from the first resource I gave you:
Corporate personhood is the legal notion that a corporation, separately from its associated human beings (like owners, managers, or employees), has some, but not all, of the legal rights and responsibilities enjoyed by natural persons (physical humans).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#Corporate_personhood_in_the_United_States
If you read that page a bit more, you’ll see that there’s a section about corporate political spending.
***
Let’s recap.
Exxon is a person. Because it’s a person, it is allowed to invest in the entertainment division of the militaro-industrial complex, i.e. politics. Because it’s a person, it can get sued.
Exxon is also one of the biggest beasts of the corporate world. Just imagine the resources It took to bring the tobacco industry to reason. Yet they still do silly things elsewhere in the world. Take for instance what they did in Australia and Africa:
Seems that science is not settled regarding the preference of women to smaller babies.
Half-baked letters and op-eds might not be enough.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by aneipris
“Are you familiar with karma?”
With a major boost from an almost unfathomable stupidity.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Jim D
It looks more like hypocrisy to me to complain about something and then support the exact same thing when it goes the other way. It is a common theme around here and needs pointing out when it is done.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Jim D
Smith is your version of Grijalva. It’s the same thing. It’s Congress in action.
↧
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by jim2
It’s OK to be tribal Jimmy D. Write that down. It is oh such a good thing that the Dr. Hypocrite got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
↧
Comment on The uncertainty of climate sensitivity and its implication for the Paris negotiations by Jim D
However, even these optimistic sensitivities require action along the lines of 80% reductions by 2100.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Danny Thomas
JIM D,
Opportunity to be clear. Are you saying that you (or anyone else here who professes a higher level of climate concern) came out against the RICO tactic?
Now you’re not Willard, but I gave him credit for doing so and he specifically corrected me. So by the standard you’re applying, Willard must be for this investigation also!
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Jim D
This tribalism just dilutes the outrage your lot had with RICO being applied. It shows that RICO in the other direction would have been wholeheartedly supported. It’s not a moral issue, just tribal. Don’t use these things as some kind of morality argument when you would do the exact same thing.
↧
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Jim D
We haven’t seen how they apply RICO yet. It looks like just another potential tool to me until I see it in action, then I would judge it. So far all the outrage is plain speculating, some of it wild.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by matthewrmarler
willard: <i>Where, MattStat? </i>
willard: <i>DavidT wants Denizens (go team!) to believe that the “supporters” refer to a “very broad category” that includes “people like JC who have testified before Congress against [CAGW].” Does it mean this amounts to evidence that Judy has been guilty of documented misdeeds or that she supports abstract entities that do? In fact, which corporation in the fossil fuel industry does Judy support exactly? </i>
granted, it is merely mockery, not an actual proposition or dispute. You have not written a proposition yet that is on point. It was I who pointed out that, despite your mockery, Prof Curry is actually in the ill-defined class of supporters, if the prosecutors or investigators choose to investigate or prosecute her. If you think that she isn't, you have had and still have the opportunity to say it straight out, and elucidate why you think so.
↧
Comment on The uncertainty of climate sensitivity and its implication for the Paris negotiations by Barnes
Nice tantrum there AK, blind ideology at its best. Keep coming up with those marvelous schemes of yours to save humanity from the evils of fossil fuels and kudzu. Maybe you can make a presentation in Paris to see how well it sells there. Its fools like you coming up with expensive, hairbrained solutions to non existent problems that pose the real dangers.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Danny Thomas
JimD,
So you’re ‘waiting to judge how RICO is applied, but are choosing to go ahead and judge so called skeptics as hypocritical right now when it appears pretty clear that Skulka has posted his letter to Obama (a political act) on his site funded by taxpayers all while taking substantial funds for himself, paying family and friends handsomely (and openly)? Should RICO be considered in the Skulka case, or would that be hypocritical?
It appears there is substantial evidence of impropriety by Skulka, wouldn’t you agree? If not, why not? If you’re waiting on judging RICO why would you not support this action against Skulka based on the information at hand?
I don’t recall you stating anything against Grijalva’s action other than calling it an over reaction. You did state ‘scientists’ didn’t seem to be happy with it. But quite obviously a group of 20 scientists were okay with signing a letter to Obama asking for RICO.
http://judithcurry.com/2015/02/25/conflicts-of-interest-in-climate-science/#comment-678679
So, I’ll be happy to provide another chance at this one as asked above: “Opportunity to be clear. Are you saying that you (or anyone else here who professes a higher level of climate concern) came out against the RICO tactic?” (So far, I only know of 20 who indicated by signature they were all for it).
↧
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Don Monfort
Stop the whining, yimmy. The RICO 20 are vicious little twerps sucking mightily on the public teat. We are not paying them to go around trying to get people RICOed. That is not their freaking job, yimmy. We need a little Congressional oversight of those rascals.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by bedeverethewise
Thanks for clarifying Michael, now I understand that the incitement to violence you were referring to was of the imagined variety.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Jim D
I also don’t know enough to judge Dr. Shukla (note correct spelling for future) yet. Looks like you have convicted him already, probably based on blog postings as evidence. I have not come out against RICO. Like I say, it depends how they use it. It is a very specific law that they are looking to apply. It might not even make it to a court, so it is too early to say anything.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by Jim D
Congress are doing a lot of oversight on both sides, Whitehouse, Grijalva, Inhofe and now Smith. They are keeping themselves very busy. Good for them. That’s what we elect them and pay for.
↧
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by bedeverethewise
As a Minnesotan, I can summarize how the report relates to my home state, the summers will be slightly more pleasant and the winters will be slightly less unpleasant.
Of course, Spencer, Lindzen, Harper and Mendelsohn go into far greater detail.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by bedeverethewise
Grijalva and Whitehouse were going fishing, desperate to for any nibble that they could turn into a huge fish tale. For Smith, the fish jumped right into the boat and it looks like it’s a whopper.
↧
Comment on My Fox News op-ed on RICO by bedeverethewise
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
