The "Climate Gate" conspiracy theory: Game Over

Wow, eights after the Iraq War you still can admit you were mistaken to support it, and after two credible investigations into "climate gate" you still can't admit you were duped into believing a fantastical conspiracy theory.

you're totally irrational, man. But, no worries. Science doesn't depend on the message board opinions of Dixie and Superfreak.

Climate Audit? Hilarious, I knew you were getting your info from a rightwing blog, run by a guy who isn't even a qualified climate scientist who does his own research.

Dude, I can't even respond to "climate audit". But, thanks for the laugh.


As for "no statistically significant warming in the past 15 years", yeah, that's something else you picked up off rightwing blogs.

Because if you paid attention to the actual BBC interview, Dr. Jones explicitly said that it's hard to establish statistical significance at shorter temporal scales. Like ten or 15 years.

The last ten years have been the warmest on record. Given a longer period of time, as climatologists use, rather than starting with a cherry picked interval beginning in 1995 - a random starting point for which Dr. Jone's interviewer gave no reason for choosing.

You've been duped. Again. The following graph will explain it to you. Where you were duped should be easily understood with a simple graph.

No offence man, I can't waste my time with rightwing blog nonsense. Get back to me when you have links to reputable and internationally recognized science experts. Until then have fun with Climate Audit, redstate.org and pajamasmedia/blogspot.com!


tempx.jpg



ufoid.jpg
 
Last edited:
Wow, eights after the Iraq War you still can admit you were mistaken to support it, and after two credible investigations into "climate gate" you still can't admit you were duped into believing a fantastical conspiracy theory.

Now we all can see just how desperate you are to believe the idiocy you have been fed. So desperate are you that you attempt to bring the Iraq War into the discussion. It has NO relevance to this topic at all. Thanks for admitting you are still to chickenshit to actually address Jone's comments.

you're totally irrational, man. But, no worries. Science doesn't depend on the message board opinions of Dixie and Superfreak.

LMAO... I am irrational for asking you to provide your opinion on why one of the leading climate fear mongers has publicly stated that there has been NO significant warming in the past 15 years?

You asked for a credible link. I gave it to you. You suggested I 'read the BBC interview'. I posted the link to the interview and quoted directly both the questions and the complete answers. Yet no matter what I do, it will never be enough or 'credible' enough for you because you are a complete hack who is intent upon clinging desperately to the flat earth fear mongering tales of woe that idiots like Gore spoon fed other idiots like you.

Climate Audit? Hilarious, I knew you were getting your info from a rightwing blog, run by a guy who isn't even a qualified climate scientist who does his own research.

Once again you show your ignorance. Whether you like him or not, his DATA came from one of your precious government agencies that are unimpeachable (according to you). So instead of addressing the data, not McIntyres opinions or discussion, but the actual DATA... you instead pretend that it is simply a right wing blog.

Then you attack him for not being a qualified climate scientist who does his own research?

1) He obviously did his own research into the statistics... which he IS qualifed to do and found errors that your unimpeachable Goddard had published and subsequently had to correct. He has obviously done the research into the number of research stations being used.

2) I can't help but notice you also were a Gore worshipping twit at the time he released his propaganda piece an Inconvenient truth. Yet Gore is also not a scientist and he most certainly did not do his own research. He did blatantly lie.... but not a peep from you on his scientific creditials or his lack of his own research.

Dude, I can't even respond to "climate audit". But, thanks for the laugh.

As for "no statistically significant warming in the past 15 years", yeah, that's something else you picked up off rightwing blogs.

No dipshit. I pulled the question and the complete answer from the BBC interview. You simply want to pretend it is from some rightwing blog. Because that is your standard answer anytime someone poses a question you can't answer.

Because if you paid attention to the actual BBC interview, Dr. Jones explicitly said that it's hard to establish statistical significance at shorter temporal scales. Like ten or 15 years. [/quote

Again moron, I posted the actual interview. I read it and understood what he said. Not surprising that you attempt to cherry pick one portion of his comments and take it for gospel. Why don't you explain to us why it is that 15 years worth of data isn't enough for statistical analysis?

Bottom line, this is a cop out on Jones part. Statistical analysis isn't any harder for a 15 year period than it is for a 30 year period.

The last ten years have been the warmest on record. Given a longer period of time, as climatologists prefer to use, rather than starting with a cherry picked interval beginning in 1995 - a random starting point for which Dr. Jone's interviewer gave no reason for choosing.

Ah... now you go back to your previous idiocy from years past. Taking a look back at intervals of the past ten years is not cherry picking. Neither is a 15 year period.

No one is questioning that temperatures rose from 1975-1998. No one is questioning that we have had the warmest decade on record. But while it has been the warmest on record.... it HAS NOT CONTINUED TO GET WARMER. We have not seen any significant warming since 1998.



You've been duped. Again. The following graph will explain it to you. Where you were duped should be easily understood with a simple graph.

No offence man, I can't waste my time with rightwing blog nonsense. Get back to me when you have links to reputable and internationally recognized science experts. Until then have fun with Climate Audit, redstate.org and pajamasmedia/blogspot.com!

No offense taken Cypress. Everyone who reads this thread understands why you are running away from this issue. Everyone here understands that the data was presented to you as you asked.

First from one of your unimpeachable people... Jones... then data from a government agency. Yet you continue to pretend everything is simply from a rightwing blog. Because that is your pathetic excuse for everything your masters haven't explained to you.

You are a hack.

Have fun being a flat earth fear mongering brain dead lemming... because that is all you are and ever shall be.
 
I just want to know why the graph is reliable when Jones himself says the data are unreproduceable...
 
Side note Cypress.... thanks for the graph. It also shows there has been no warming since 1998. I appreciate that you have finally accepted that FACT and are now quoting charts that prove it.
 
I just want to know why the graph is reliable when Jones himself says the data is unreproduceable...

Because people like Jones told Cypress it is.... and we all know Jones is unimpeachable... well except for times when he says something Cypress doesn't like. Then Jones' words in a direct quote are nothing more than something we pull from right wing blog sites... like the BBC.
 
Because people like Jones told Cypress it is.... and we all know Jones is unimpeachable... well except for times when he says something Cypress doesn't like. Then Jones' words in a direct quote are nothing more than something we pull from right wing blog sites... like the BBC.

Are you saying that the BBC is right wing? That's extraordinary because many people say that BBC is left wing?
 
Are you saying that the BBC is right wing? That's extraordinary because many people say that BBC is left wing?

I was being sarcastic. Cypress claims anything that disputes his global warming fear mongering is a right wing blog. Since I posted the BBC interview with Jones stating the he doesn't believe the 'debate is over' AND he admits there is no significant global warming over the past 15 years.... well, since the BBC posted it, they are now a right wing site according to Cypress's standards.
 
I love how Crypiss laughs at Climate Audit. Steve was an IPCC reviewer until he began uncovering their lies. And he's been proven correct! Proven!

The statistics are where the fraud lies and it took a statistician to uncover it.
 
I was being sarcastic. Cypress claims anything that disputes his global warming fear mongering is a right wing blog. Since I posted the BBC interview with Jones stating the he doesn't believe the 'debate is over' AND he admits there is no significant global warming over the past 15 years.... well, since the BBC posted it, they are now a right wing site according to Cypress's standards.


OK, thanks.
 
Alter climate is a skilled technique, only so many people don't know it. Here is a news briefing 13 years ago:

DoD News Briefing: Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen

April 28, 1997

Alvin Toeffler has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.



http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=674
 
We have come a long way in the last 20 years.

Hardly anyone now is even trying to deny that fossil fuel burning by humans is effecting the climate. And those few who do try to deny it are half hearted at best, or mentally ill at worst (see Into The Night)
 
“Their lying,” ever notice how anytime anyone or even anything shows the wingers are wrong, be it a person, organization, or source, even if fully documenting what is being presented, “their lying.”

All part of the “alternative” view, “fair and balance” bullshit, with that mentality out there, it is easy for the energy interests to present the false paradigm which the lemmings swallow eagerly
 
“Their lying,” ever notice how anytime anyone or even anything shows the wingers are wrong, be it a person, organization, or source, even if fully documenting what is being presented, “their lying.”

All part of the “alternative” view, “fair and balance” bullshit, with that mentality out there, it is easy for the energy interests to present the false paradigm which the lemmings swallow eagerly

environmental alarmism is to justify eugenics and genocide.

https://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/



UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL.----Rosa Koire

REMEMBER: AGENDA 2030 IS AGENDA 21. THE AGENDA FOR THE 21ST CENTURY (AGENDA 21) IS A ONE HUNDRED YEAR PLAN. AGENDA 2030 IS A MILESTONE YEAR, OBVIOUSLY 30 YEARS IN. DON'T BE FOOLED INTO DISREGARDING UN AGENDA 21 AS 'OUTDATED' OR UPDATED BY AGENDA 2030. THIS IS A MANIPULATION DESIGNED TO BURY ALL OF THE OBJECTIONS AND ACTIVISM AGAINST AGENDA 21.

CLICK HERE TO READ OUR BLOG

Have you wondered where these terms 'sustainability' and 'smart growth' and 'high density urban mixed use development' came from? Doesn't it seem like about 10 years ago you'd never heard of them and now everything seems to include these concepts? Is that just a coincidence? That every town and county and state and nation in the world would be changing their land use/planning codes and government policies to align themselves with...what?

First, before I get going, I want to say that yes, I know it's a small world and it takes a village and we're all one planet etc. I also know that we have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and that as cumbersome as that can be sometimes (Donald Rumsfeld said that the Chinese have it easy; they don't have to ask their people if they agree. And Bush Junior said that it would be great to have a dictator as long as he was the dictator), we have a three branch government and the Bill of Rights, Constitution, and self-determination. This is one of the reasons why people want to come to the US, right? We don't have Tiananmen Square here, generally speaking (yes, I remember Kent State--not the same, and yes, an outrage.) So I'm not against making certain issues a priority, such as mindful energy use, alternative energy sponsorship, recycling/reuse, and sensitivity to all living creatures.

But then you have UN Agenda 21. What is it? See our videos and radio shows at the bottom of this page, on our video page (or search YouTube for Rosa Koire) or
Buy BEHIND THE GREEN MASK: U.N. Agenda 21 by Rosa Koire

CLICK TO PRINT OUT FLYER: WHY IS EVERYONE TALKING ABOUT UN AGENDA 21?

Considering its policies are woven into all the General Plans of the cities and counties, it's important for people to know where these policies are coming from. While many people support the United Nations for its 'peacemaking' efforts, hardly anyone knows that they have very specific land use policies that they would like to see implemented in every city, county, state and nation. The specific plan is called United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development, which has its basis in Communitarianism. By now, most Americans have heard of sustainable development but are largely unaware of Agenda 21.

In a nutshell, the plan calls for governments to take control of all land use and not leave any of the decision making in the hands of private property owners. It is assumed that people are not good stewards of their land and the government will do a better job if they are in control. Individual rights in general are to give way to the needs of communities as determined by the governing body. Moreover, people should be rounded up off the land and packed into human settlements, or islands of human habitation, close to employment centers and transportation. Another program, called the Wildlands Project spells out how most of the land is to be set aside for non-humans.

U.N. Agenda 21 cites the affluence of Americans as being a major problem which needs to be corrected. It calls for lowering the standard of living for Americans so that the people in poorer countries will have more, a redistribution of wealth. Although people around the world aspire to achieve the levels of prosperity we have in our country, and will risk their lives to get here, Americans are cast in a very negative light and need to be taken down to a condition closer to average in the world. Only then, they say, will there be social justice which is a cornerstone of the U.N. Agenda 21 plan.

Agenda 21 policies date back to the 70's but it got its real start in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro when President Bush signed onto it. Click here to see a list of the countries that signed UN Agenda 21. President Clinton took office the following year and created the President's Council on Sustainable Development to implement it in the United States. Made up of federal agencies, corporations, and non-profit groups, the President's Council on Sustainable Development moved quickly to ensure that all federal agencies would change their policies to comply with UN Agenda 21. A non-governmental organization called the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives, ICLEI, is tasked with carrying out the goals of Agenda 21 worldwide. Remember: UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is a global plan that is implemented locally. Over 600 cities in the U.S. are members; our town joined in 2007. The costs are paid by taxpayers.

It's time that people educate themselves and read the document and related commentary. After that, get a copy of your city or county's General Plan and read it. You will find all sorts of policies that are nearly identical to those in U.N. Agenda 21. Unfortunately, their policies have advanced largely unnoticed and we are now in the end game. People need to identify their elected officials who are promoting the U.N.'s policies and hold them accountable for their actions. Only when we've identified who the people are and what they are trying to do will we be able to evaluate whether or not we approve of the policies they are putting forward. Some people may think it's appropriate for agencies outside the United States to set our policies and some people will not. The question is, aren't Americans able to develop their own policies? Should we rely on an organization that consists of member nations that have different forms of governments, most of which do not value individual rights as much as we do? It's time to bring U.N. Agenda 21 out in the open where we can have these debates and then set our own policies in accordance with our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
***

Ok, you say, interesting, but I don't see how that really affects me. Here are a few ways:

No matter where you live, I'll bet that there have been hundreds of condos built in the center of your town recently. Over the last ten years there has been a 'planning revolution' across the US. Your commercial, industrial, and multi-residential land was rezoned to 'mixed use.' Nearly everything that got approvals for development was designed the same way: ground floor retail with two stories of residential above. Mixed use. Very hard to finance for construction, and very hard to manage since it has to have a high density of people in order to justify the retail. A lot of it is empty and most of the ground floor retail is empty too. High bankruptcy rate.

So what? Most of your towns provided funding and/or infrastructure development for these private projects. They used Redevelopment Agency funds. Your money. Specifically, your property taxes. Notice how there's very little money in your General Funds now, and most of that is going to pay Police and Fire? Your street lights are off, your parks are shaggy, your roads are pot-holed, your hospitals are closing. The money that should be used for these things is diverted into the Redevelopment Agency. It's the only agency in government that can float a bond without a vote of the people. And they did that, and now you're paying off those bonds for the next 45 years with your property taxes. Did you know that? And by the way, even if Redevelopment is ended, as in California, they still have to pay off existing debt--for 30 to 45 years.

So, what does this have to do with Agenda 21?

Redevelopment is a tool used to further the Agenda 21 vision of remaking America's cities. With redevelopment, cities have the right to take property by eminent domain---against the will of the property owner, and give it or sell it to a private developer. By declaring an area of town 'blighted' (and in some cities over 90% of the city area has been declared blighted) the property taxes in that area can be diverted away from the General Fund. This constriction of available funds is impoverishing the cities, forcing them to offer less and less services, and reducing your standard of living. They'll be telling you that it's better, however, since they've put in nice street lights and colored paving. The money gets redirected into the Redevelopment Agency and handed out to favored developers building low income housing and mixed use. Smart Growth. Cities have had thousands of condos built in the redevelopment areas and are telling you that you are terrible for wanting your own yard, for wanting privacy, for not wanting to be dictated to by a Condo Homeowner's Association Board, for being anti-social, for not going along to get along, for not moving into a cramped apartment downtown where they can use your property taxes for paying off that huge bond debt. But it's not working, and you don't want to move in there. So they have to make you. Read on.

Human habitation, as it is referred to now, is restricted to lands within the Urban Growth Boundaries of the city. Only certain building designs are permitted. Rural property is more and more restricted in what uses can be on it. Although counties say that they support agricultural uses, eating locally produced food, farmer's markets, etc, in fact there are so many regulations restricting water and land use (there are scenic corridors, inland rural corridors, baylands corridors, area plans, specific plans, redevelopment plans, huge fees, fines) that farmers are losing their lands altogether. County roads are not being paved. The push is for people to get off of the land, become more dependent, come into the cities. To get out of the suburbs and into the cities. Out of their private homes and into condos. Out of their private cars and onto their bikes.

Bikes. What does that have to do with it? I like to ride my bike and so do you. So what? Bicycle advocacy groups are very powerful now. Advocacy. A fancy word for lobbying, influencing, and maybe strong-arming the public and politicians. What's the conection with bike groups? National groups such as Complete Streets, Thunderhead Alliance, and others, have training programs teaching their members how to pressure for redevelopment, and training candidates for office. It's not just about bike lanes, it's about remaking cities and rural areas to the 'sustainable model'. High density urban development without parking for cars is the goal. This means that whole towns need to be demolished and rebuilt in the image of sustainable development. Bike groups are being used as the 'shock troops' for this plan.

What plan? We're losing our homes since this recession/depression began, and many of us could never afford those homes to begin with. We got cheap money, used whatever we had to squeak into those homes, and now some of us lost them. We were lured, indebted, and sunk. Whole neighborhoods are empty in some places. Some are being bulldozed. Cities cannot afford to extend services outside of their core areas. Slowly, people will not be able to afford single family homes. Will not be able to afford private cars. Will be more dependent. More restricted. More easily watched and monitored.

This plan is a whole life plan. It involves the educational system, the energy market, the transportation system, the governmental system, the health care system, food production, and more. The plan is to restrict your choices, limit your funds, narrow your freedoms, and take away your voice. One of the ways is by using the Delphi Technique to 'manufacture consensus.' Another is to infiltrate community groups or actually start neighborhood associations with hand-picked 'leaders'. Another is to groom and train future candidates for local offices. Another is to sponsor non-governmental groups that go into schools and train children. Another is to offer federal and private grants and funding for city programs that further the agenda. Another is to educate a new generation of land use planners to require New Urbanism. Another is to convert factories to other uses, introduce energy measures that penalize manufacturing, and set energy consumption goals to pre-1985 levels. Another is to allow unregulated immigration in order to lower standards of living and drain local resources.

All of this sounds unbelievable until you have had direct experience with it. You probably have, but unless you resisted it you won't know it's happening. That's why we'd like you to read our blog 'The Way We See It' (click here). Go to the section in the blog (look on the right side under Categories) called Our Story. You'll get a look at how two unsuspecting people fell into a snake pit and survived to tell about it.

RADIO
There are many radio shows on the web---just search Rosa's name. Here are some from the past. You'll find more recent interviews and videos by putting Rosa's name in your search browser. Yes, some have been removed from the web because the truth is considered subversive and dangerous.

Rosa with Elena, The View From Montana Sept 13, 2012 click here

Rosa with Rumor Mill News' Melinda Pillsbury-Foster Feb 21, 2012 click


Rosa with KSFO's BARBARA SIMPSON JANUARY 15, 2012 (problem with this link, we're working on it)

Rosa with Marti Oakley on TS Radio January 11, 2012 Great show! click here

ROSA KOIRE WITH MAGGIE RODDIN ON THE UNSOLICITED OPINION, SEPT 23, 2011 CLICK HERE

ROSA KOIRE DEBATES LYNN PLAMBECK 'IS AGENDA 21 REAL?', RADIO, SEPT 1, 2011 CLICK HERE

Rosa Koire, Democrats Against UN Agenda 21, FreeMeNowRadio CLICK HERE
 
The plan is to restrict your choices, limit your funds, narrow your freedoms, and take away your voice. One of the ways is by using the Delphi Technique to 'manufacture consensus.' Another is to infiltrate community groups or actually start neighborhood associations with hand-picked 'leaders'. Another is to groom and train future candidates for local offices. Another is to sponsor non-governmental groups that go into schools and train children. Another is to offer federal and private grants and funding for city programs that further the agenda. Another is to educate a new generation of land use planners to require New Urbanism. Another is to convert factories to other uses, introduce energy measures that penalize manufacturing, and set energy consumption goals to pre-1985 levels. Another is to allow unregulated immigration in order to lower standards of living and drain local resources.
 
We have come a long way in the last 20 years. Hardly anyone now is even trying to deny that fossil fuel burning by humans is effecting the climate.
** affecting, not effecting.

Humans do not burn fossils for fuel. Do you mean carbon-based fuels?

Define "the climate". There is no "the climate" with regard to Earth. Climate, like weather, is a very localized term. Did you know that Wisconsin has a desert climate within it? I've been there before. It has sand, snakes, lizards, cacti, and other desert climate related critters and fauna. Most of Wisconsin is not a desert climate though.

And those few who do try to deny it are half hearted at best, or mentally ill at worst (see Into The Night)
Don't like people who don't share your Church of Global Warming beliefs, eh?
 
Humans do not burn fossils for fuel. Do you mean carbon-based fuels?

Fossil fuels are fuels you need to dig up from another geological era. Most "carbon-based" fuels would be fossil fuels, with the obvious exception of wood, and the less obvious exception of peat. Wood is not dug up, it is cut down. Peat is dug up, but is not from another geological era.
 
Fossil fuels are fuels you need to dig up from another geological era.
... such as??

Most "carbon-based" fuels would be fossil fuels,
We do not burn fossils for fuel, dumbass.

with the obvious exception of wood, and the less obvious exception of peat.
Wood and peat are not fossils, dumbass.

Wood is not dug up, it is cut down. Peat is dug up, but is not from another geological era.
Wood and peat are not fossils, dumbass.
 
We have come a long way in the last 20 years.

Hardly anyone now is even trying to deny that fossil fuel burning by humans is effecting the climate. And those few who do try to deny it are half hearted at best, or mentally ill at worst (see Into The Night)

And Tommy.
 
The plan is to restrict your choices, limit your funds, narrow your freedoms, and take away your voice. yaddy-blah-blah psycho paranoia

I wonder if those ppl in Kentucky who lost everything in the recent flooding feel "free"? Do you think all those hundreds of humans who have died during the ongoing heat wave in Europe have a voice? Will your funds be limited when your house goes up in smoke due to a wildfire and you have to pay out of pocket for what insurance doesn't cover? Are you afraid that if you choose to buy a gasoline-powered vehicle, you'll be scorned by others? What will happen to your "choices" when it's 105F outside and your area suffers a power black-out?

You climate change deniers sound more shrill and hysterical with each passing day.
 
Back
Top