The Great Global Warming Swindle

[rickoff]

@AI_AGW@CFACT (follow us!) often receives many of these unsolicited messages each day. Since the bot became active on May 26, 2010, it has sent out over 40,000 tweets, or an average of more than 240 updates per day.

[Farmhand]

Hi rickoff, you uncover a lot of stuff that is interesting. I'm an Aussie and this
"Nigel Leck" makes me angry. Is what he is doing not somehow illeagal ?

Regards.

[Joit]

That is in the Hands and the Terms of the Host to decide that.

[greenliving]

Ive seen the film 2012 its hilarious and close to reality.its scary when you think that ots gonna happen in the future.Global warming also involved.

[Joit]

Make Fear and give little little Hope is allways what they make.
Even at the brainwash industry Hollywood.
Sidenote to "No1 Movie" Who do decide this what is No1.

[Peter Lindemann]

Latest News

Hi All,

Well, winter has hit Spokane early this year. 10 days after the Renaissance Conference, we have 6 inches of snow on the ground. Today, day time temperatures hit only +9F (-12C) at Spokane International Airport, with temperatures around -10F (-23C) last night. 6 to 11 more inches of snow are predicted for the next few days, right through the Thanksgiving Holiday.

So, with that in mind, here is the latest news story about the next Climate Conference in Cancun, Mexico.

BBC News - Modest hopes for climate summit, as gas levels rise

Enjoy,
Peter

[rickoff]

Hi rickoff, you uncover a lot of stuff that is interesting. I'm an Aussie and this "Nigel Leck" makes me angry. Is what he is doing not somehow illegal ?

What you are referring to, of course, is an earlier post that I made, in which I stated,

"Nigel Leck, an Australian software developer, grew tired of debating climate realists on Twitter so he created a spambot to wear down his opponents. The bot, @AI_AGW@CFACT (follow us!) often receives many of these unsolicited messages each day. Since the bot became active on May 26, 2010, it has sent out over 40,000 tweets, or an average of more than 240 updates per day."

While Internet spamming is frowned upon, it still is practiced rather widely, and to my knowledge is not strictly illegal unless posting the content constitutes an illegal act. For example, if one person posts something false that is intended to harm someone else's reputation, that could be considered as defamation of character, which is illegal in most places. Unless both the victim and the perpetrator live in the same country, though, that would be difficult to impossible to enforce. And in Nigel's case, he is only posting contrary opinion "answers" to statements posted by climate realists, which really does not smack of illegality. As long as he posts identical answers to spambot captured keywords, though, most forum posters will quickly realize that it is simply repetitive spam, and won't even bother reading or responding to it. I'm sure he realizes that, and if he is good at what he is doing then he probably has worked out multiple answers for a keyword, or combination of keywords. It's all done automatically, so he just sits back and laughs. There really isn't much you can do to combat him, other than perhaps setting up a spambot to answer his posts, lol.

Rick

[ashtweth]

Guys here comes the AUSSIE summer, i would need a carton of beer a day if Peter L was here to keep him cool . On a serious note i bet its going to be an eye opener,HOTTER then ever.. we had a FRESH CHEMICAL TRAIL out side the Panacea head office today

tell me that Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-Engineering is not part of dealing with "climate change" , it may be..tell me why in the HOT Aussie Sun at 30o that you can get an "ice crystal" as such low altitude.

[rickoff]

Re: Un Climate Conference in Cancun Mexico

I echo the sentiment expressed in this Cfact article:

"Can you imagine the pain we'll be forced to bear if President Obama agrees to transfer hundreds of billions of our dollars to fund climate payoffs to carbon profiteers and corrupt Third World dictators at the same time his domestic spending spree is adding trillions to our national debt at home?

If this conference succeeds where Copenhagen failed, it could cost the global economy trillions of dollarsdoing nothingCfact.org

[aussieaussieaussie]

Guys here comes the AUSSIE summer, i would need a carton of beer a day if Peter L was here to keep him cool . On a serious note i bet its going to be an eye opener,HOTTER then ever.. we had a FRESH CHEMICAL TRAIL out side the Panacea head office today

tell me that Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-Engineering is not part of dealing with "climate change" , it may be..tell me why in the HOT Aussie Sun at 30o that you can get an "ice crystal" as such low altitude.

HAHAHA, Ash that plane is cruising at 10,000m which means the temperature up there is -60 degrees celsius. I do believe that is a good temperature for ice to form!

The con trail clearly is above the lower clouds which would average 3000m high or approx temperature of -5 degrees celsius

Folks! Read the science of climate change! Don't read the newspaper, especially the opinion section - READ a science journal! Once you do this you realize 10,000 scientists say there IS climate change and 3 scientists paid by big oil say there is no such thing.

I am not saying I agree with carbon taxes etc, but folks if you think there is no such thing as climate change - please pull your head out of the sand!

Thanks,

Ozy

[Aaron]

weather changes

if you think there is no such thing as climate change - please pull your head out of the sand!

Or maybe you need to look at the real science. This is NOT about denying
there are interesting things happening. However, blaming it on human caused
co2 is ridiculous and there is no science to back it.

Go look at all the quotes I posted by scientists including those from IPCC
that openly stated that the co2 claim is a fraud. Only 3 scientists paid
by big oil... yeah right, you've really done your research.

And the height of the flight path leaving trail is irrelevant when it comes
to making an ice trail. If you can think a few steps forward, when those
trails spread out laterally for miles and miles and connect to trails next to
them doing the same thing and then 100% (which is very common) of
the "cloud coverage" is completely from the trails, that is not ice crystals
and it doesn't take much common sense to see that.

Your ice argument becomes a short-sighted opinion up to the point that
it spreads out and obscures the entire sky. There is a tanker base in my
town and they conduct these operations several times a week. Zero
natural clouds, I have plenty of time-lapsed photos showing that
half a dozen trails can spread out and connect to the ones next to them,
then get whisped around by the wind and there is no blue sky left - 100%
created by the plane trails. That is not condensation, period. There is a
bit of condensation in it but when you see streamers dripping out of those,
you know it is not a homogenous mixture of water vapor.

A weakened magnetic field is what lets in more solor radiation than normal
and is responsible for the heating episodes when it happens but for the
most part, there hasn't been any global increase in temp for probably 15
years - meaning the Earth's overall temps are dropping.

I'm not going to argue about what science is what, but casting a plane's
trail automatically as ice just because what you think is about as scientific
and accurate as claiming there are 3 scientists that are against it.

[Aaron]

THOUSANDS of REAL SCIENTISTS are against the co2 SCAM

10,000 says global warming and 3 against - yeah right! The below quotes
are a drop in the bucket, it would take HOURS AND HOURS to post them
all. Any "scientific journal" that says 3 are against it should be used line
bird cages.

In case anyone hadn't heard, there are THOUSANDS of scientists
suing Al Gore for fraud in his fraudulent Inconvenient Truth power point
presentation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Highlights of the Updated 2008 Senate Minority Report featuring over 650 international scientists dissenting from man-made climate fears:

- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

- UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

- Scientist Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, a chemical engineer at Abo Akademi University in Finland, author of 200 scientific publications and former Greenpeace member.

- Solar physicist Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo. Brekke has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth.

- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

- U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

Andrei Kapitsa, a Russian geographer and Antarctic ice core researcher.

- Award Winning Physicist Dr. Will Happer, Professor at the Department of Physics at Princeton Universityand Former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, who has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.

- Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

- Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, served as staff physicist at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

- Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

.- Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

Atmospheric scientist Dr. Art V. Douglas, former Chair of the Atmospheric Sciences Department at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska, and is the author of numerous papers for peer-reviewed publications.

- Chemist Dr. Patrick Frank, who has authored more than 50 peer-reviewed articles.

- Award-Winning NASA Astronaut/Geologist and Moonwalker Jack Schmitt who flew on the Apollo 17 mission and formerly of the Norwegian Geological Survey and for the U.S. Geological Survey.

- Climatologist Dr. Richard Keen of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado.

[aussieaussieaussie]

Getting into a debate with the moderator! I will step lightly

Or maybe you need to look at the real science. This is NOT about denying
there are interesting things happening. However, blaming it on human caused
co2 is ridiculous and there is no science to back it.
Nobody says there are not other variables in the mix but, if you are looking for science to back it up - read any science journal!

Go look at all the quotes I posted by scientists including those from IPCC
that openly stated that the co2 claim is a fraud. Only 3 scientists paid
by big oil... yeah right, you've really done your research.
Latest data on Co2 is here: Atmospheric CO2: Climate's 'Control Knob' : Discovery News Have I done my research? My friend, my wife lectures on the subject for the past 10 years!

And the height of the flight path leaving trail is irrelevant when it comes
to making an ice trail.
Absolutely FALSE - the height determines the temperature, and therefore whether the conditions are there to propagated ice formation.

If you can think a few steps forward, when those
trails dissipate laterally for miles and miles and connect to trails next to
them doing the same thing and then 100% (which is very common) of
the "cloud coverage" is completely from the trails, that is not ice crystals
and it doesn't take much common sense to see that.
Ok, this 'event' you are describing - is not shown in these pictures from ASH. Completely understand what you mean though, I have checked out atmospheric data for the few days after 9/11 - very interesting! but is not evidence for chem-trails only contrails... These 'clouds' would increase temperatures on the ground and be a variable for Climate change - but of course this is man made variable... see?

Your ice argument becomes a short-sighted opinion up to the point that
it spreads out and obscures the entire sky. There is a tanker base in my
town and they conduct these operations several times a week. Zero
natural clouds, I have plenty of time-lapsed photos showing that
half a dozen trails can spread out and connect to the ones next to them,
then get whisped around by the wind and there is no blue sky left - 100%
created by the plane trails. That is not condensation, period. There is a
bit of condensation in it but when you see streamers dripping out of those,
you know it is not a homogenous mixture of water vapor.
Cool, sounds like an interesting phenomenon - maybe you should post some pics so we can analyze and rule out any simple answers.

A weakened magnetic field is what lets in more solor radiation than normal
and is responsible for the heating episodes when it happens but for the
most part, there hasn't been any global increase in temp for probably 15
years - meaning the Earth's overall temps are dropping.
Ok, sorry have to stop you there - the Earths average temperature has risen by 0.13 degrees celcius per decade in the past 50 years- PROVEN FACT! Please if you are going to debate this, we must use real scientific evidence and not opinion pieces!


I'm not going to argue about what science is what, but casting a plane's
trail automatically as ice just because what you think is about as scientific
and accurate as claiming there are 3 scientists that are against it.
Ash claiming that it's a chemtrail has no evidence to back up his claim! My claim that it's a contrail is based on current scientific understanding and Occams razor. As for your pics well, I don't comment on evidence I haven't seen.

For those of you still in denile, I suggest a healthy read of this article:
"Climategate" and Other Nonsense : Discovery News

The article is in simple layman terms, if you want actual proof check out any science journal - they all seem to agree - THERE IS NO DEBATE!

Thanks, I hope you have learned something here today.

Ozy

[aussieaussieaussie]

Nice report, but it was paid for by big oil...

After reading your quotes carefully, I find that many of them are not denying man made climate change - they are simple objecting to the current conclusions. More research needs to be done seems to be the average comment.

Also there are some clear false claims in your post many are addressed in this article:

[Aaron]

global cooling

my wife lectures on the subject for the past 10 years!

And the height of the flight path leaving trail is irrelevant when it comes
to making an ice trail.
Absolutely FALSE - the height determines the temperature, and therefore whether the conditions are there to propagated ice formation.

Sounds like you're intimately involved with the global warming belief on a
number of levels.

You obviously take my comment out of context. The next sentences were:
"If you can think a few steps forward, when those
trails dissipate laterally for miles and miles and connect to trails next to
them doing the same thing and then 100% (which is very common) of
the "cloud coverage" is completely from the trails, that is not ice crystals
and it doesn't take much common sense to see that. "

Meaning, just because it is at a height where ice crystals form does NOT
automatically mean it is simply water vapor turning into ice crystals. That
is why I'm saying it is irrelevant that it is at those altitudes since you
use altitude as the premise to base your argument that it must be ice
crystals.

Yes, there IS a debate and always will be. And those quotes revolve
heavily around the fact that there is no real evidence to show manmade
global warming is a reality. So it went from 3 paid scientists to all of those
numbers, which is still a drop in the bucket.

Also, using a little more critical thinking, just because oil has a vested
interest in not wanting their parade to be rained on doesn't mean that
science compiled by scientists that do not believe in manmade global
warming are a bunch of liars. Those distinctions are crucial to see things
for what they are I believe.

I could say the exact same thing about you. You said you're not for the
co2 tax either but I could turn that into meaning you are an oil company
agent because of your belief in that and leave out everything else you say
to take it out of context. The motive of one doesn't have
to be the motive of another just because they are saying the same thing.

I think it is a completely irrational conclusion to dismiss what they all say
just because it happens to strengthen the oil industry's side. That is one
of the most popular, irrational, illogical and meaningless arguments that
the pro global warming crowd uses.

I'm not for the co2 tax either as it is a scam on par with the what the
federal reserve has pulled but it doesn't automatically mean I want to
keep burning oil.

You can look at NASA's own admission when they were FORCED to
reanalyze their data, the warmest it has been was about 15 years ago.
And the COOLEST it has been was about the same time. In any case,
temps over the last 15 years simply have not risen and only manipulated
and cherry picked data has shown that it has.... meaning that all the
objective data, separate from all agendas and emotions, is that the Earth
is cooling.

You should take a look at Hamaker's model with glaciation because IF
there is any global warming tied to co2, it inevitably means we are moving
to an ice age and not the other way around. This is backed by MILLIONS
of years of evidence and not Al Gore's fake hockey stick.