Jump to content



Photo

Anthropomorphic Global Warming Fraud


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Russ

Russ

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 7,204 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 07:50 AM

http://armstrongecon...sed-as-a-fraud/

"The British press seem to be more honest than American, especially after Snowden. In fact, The British Daily Mail is reporting that not only was this forecast of Al Gore dead WRONG, the ice cap has actually expanded for a second year in row covering 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago and it is also thicker!

The satellite images were taken from University of Illinois’s Cryosphere project that shows the ice has become even more concentrated. Yet they want to regulate cow farting. Honestly, if politicians actually believe this nonsense is debatable. Whatever the issue seems to be will only be a concern if there is more tax revenue to be justified. They will not outlaw smoking because they get tax revenues yet under the same theory they should ban it if this was about public concern.

Global Warming has been a fantastic excuse to raise taxes and now regulate cow farting in Europe. How about eliminating all the hot air created by worthless government programs? If we eliminated career politicians and voted from our laptops on every initiative, think of all the limousines that would not be driving them around and special plane flights for their vacations."

Posted Image
"Nulla tenaci invia est via" - Latin for "For the tenacious, no road is impossible".
"In order to master the markets, you must first master yourself" ... JP Morgan
"Most people lose money because they cannot admit they are wrong"... Martin Armstrong



http://marketvisions.blogspot.com/

#2 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 26,886 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 08:14 AM

Russ... That just proves that Al Gore was right...TAXES will stop Global Warming!!!

Here is even more proof:

COLD TO GRIP NORTHEAST...

From July 1 through yesterday, the temperature dropped into the 20s at least 23 times across the contiguous U.S., according to the Weather Prediction Center in College Park, Maryland. Stanley, Idaho, posted the lowest temperature in the U.S. six times followed by Bodie State Park, California, which had the lowest mark four times.
For the cold to matter, it has to have a bite and it has to be where a lot of people live.
Snow in the Rocky Mountains in July and crispy temperatures in the Sierra Nevada don't register much on the trading floors.


Wildfires way down in '14...

This year’s below-average wildfire season comes as welcome news for Westerners, but it’s also burning a hole in the environmentalist narrative on climate change.


(End of sarcasm) ;)

Edited by Rogerdodger, 10 September 2014 - 08:26 AM.


#3 Russ

Russ

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 7,204 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 10:00 AM

lol Roger, taxes stop warming! Calgary is digging out from a snow-storm today Sept. 10th too.
"Nulla tenaci invia est via" - Latin for "For the tenacious, no road is impossible".
"In order to master the markets, you must first master yourself" ... JP Morgan
"Most people lose money because they cannot admit they are wrong"... Martin Armstrong



http://marketvisions.blogspot.com/

#4 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 26,886 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 01:37 PM

lol Roger, taxes stop warming!
Calgary is digging out from a snow-storm today Sept. 10th too.

No Named Storms First Time Since 1992 at Hurricane Peak...
Calgary struggles with summer snowfall...

YA SEE! Al Gore's plan IS working!

But maybe too well?
Soon we will have to CUT TAXES and go back to the 1970's plan to sprinkle soot (carbon) on the snow and ice to warm up the planet.
:wacko: :wacko:


Scientists Considered Pouring Soot Over the Arctic in the 1970s to Help Melt the Ice – In Order to Prevent Another Ice Age

On April 28, 1975, Newsweek wrote an article stating:

Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.


Edited by Rogerdodger, 10 September 2014 - 01:47 PM.


#5 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 03:28 PM

Posting that anthropogenic global warming is a fraud and then using evidence of the lack of warming (e.g., ice sheets, Oklahoma snowfalls) is clearly a sign that a poster is at best a close-minded ideologue, if not a little light on the IQ scale.

Let me see if I can do some further charitable work here (again)

The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project has laid to rest whether there is global warming. As former climate skeptic, and lead BEST researcher put it -

http://www.nytimes.c...ge-skeptic.html

CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.

My total turnaround, in such a short time, is the result of careful and objective analysis by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, which I founded with my daughter Elizabeth. Our results show that the average temperature of the earth’s land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases.


Now maybe this convert went too far in concluding the warming was anthropogenic (that means "human caused" - just in case we're dealing with any morons here), but nobody except a tiny close-minded sliver of the most radical climate skeptics hold onto the notion that warming has not, and is not, occurring. Most climate skeptics are smart enough to know that holding onto the completely denigrated notion of no-warming just makes them look like fact-less ideologues with questionable brain matter.

There are plenty of valid arguments for why the proven global warming is not anthropogenic (e.g., natural cycles, sun spots, lack of dino-farts). Why not focus on that? Talking about ice sheets, cold temperatures, snow falls, etc., etc., just makes one look like, well, let's just say your likely not gong to get any invitation from Mensa in the mail any time soon.

Edited by salsabob, 10 September 2014 - 03:29 PM.

John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#6 Russ

Russ

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 7,204 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 10:22 PM

Well , you are calling Martin Armstrong a moron, he is the guy if you bother to click the link above... that called AGM a fraud, after all Al Gore said all the ice in the Arctic would be gone by now and for that he got the Nobel Prize! Your tendency to label others who disagree with you as morons or low IQ is really objective.


Read this one too... http://armstrongecon...-warming-trend/

"The Global Warming crowd is now desperately trying to counter-act the data that says they are quite frankly about as credible as the old Y2K crowd back in 2000. The data have clearly shown that they have lied, manipulated, and outright carried out a major fraud upon society. They argue that man has altered the entire planet in just a few decades which is like focusing on a 7 day reaction in a bear market and declaring it’s really a bull market. The theory is totally unsound simply from a realistic research perspective.

The fact that surface temperatures have not warmed over the past 17 years showing that their climate models are unreliable, is now amazingly being refuted with quick new research led by James Risbey. In just a matter of weeks, he is leading the charge demonstrating his clearly predisposed bias. Risbey now excuses their nonsense of models that have overestimated global warming with a slapped together study published in Nature Climate Change asserting that their models actually generate good estimates of recent and past trends provided they also took into account natural variability known as El Nino-La Nina phases in the Pacific. OOPS! Cycles?

It is just amazing how these people are so sold on claiming millions of years can be altered in just a few decades like a 7 day rally in the middle of the Great Depression. Risbey is clueless obviously that cycles exist or how they function and claiming that the oceans are absorbing the heat so we do not feel it is clever. Effective he states he would be right but for El Nino-La Mina phases. OMG – is this cycles? He actually states: “You’re always going to get periods when the warming slows down or speeds up relative to the mean rate because we have these strong natural cycles”.

So lets see, there are roughly 30-year cycles (Pi cycle 31.4 years) whereby the Pacific alternates between periods of more frequent El Ninos – when the ocean gives back heat to the atmosphere – to La Ninas, when it acts as a massive heat sink, setting in train relatively cool periods for surface temperatures. This has been taking place before the Industrial Revolution. Violent storms were far worse at the bottom on the 300 year cycle in the energy output of the sun in the 18th century.

The record of the biggest hurricane seasons in the Atlantic since the start of the 20th century reveals only a cycle, not a progressive trend escalating that builds like a bull market.

1. 1950 8
2. 2005 7
3. 1999 6
3. 1996 6
3. 1964 6
3. 1961 6
3. 1955 6
3. 1926 6
By selecting climate models in phase with natural variability, Risbey is desperately trying to argue the global warming core trend is correct. Quite frankly, a few decades does not cut it. In market forecasting, this is no different from following Black–Scholes model that led to the Long-Term Capital Management collapse in 1998 when Genius Failed because they tested the model with data only back to 1971.

Even looking at the historical record of storms, none of the worst even took place during the 20th century.

Where-Year-Deaths

Gulf of Mexico 1590 1,000
Nicaragua 1605 1300
Straits of Florida 1622 1090
Cuba and Florida 1644 1500
Caribbean 1666 2000
Barbados 1694 1000+
Bahamas 1715 1,000 – 2,500
Martinique 1767 1,600
Havana 1768 43 – 1,000
Newfoundland August 29 – September 9, 1775 North Carolina, Virginia, Newfoundland 4,000 – 4,163
Pointe-à-Pitre Bay 1776 6,000+
San Calixto October 9–20, 1780 Lesser Antilles, Puerto Rico, Hispaniola, Bermuda 27,501+
Gulf of Mexico 1780 2,000
Jamaica and Cuba 1780 42 – 1,090
Florida 1781 2,000+
Central Atlantic 1782 3,000+
“Cuba” Hurricane 1791 30 – 3,000
“Martinique 1813 3,000+
Caribbean 1824 372 – 1,300+
Barbados–Louisiana August 10–17, 1831 Barbados, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Louisiana 1,500 – 2,500
Risbey stated: “The climate is simply variable on short time scales but that variability is superimposed on an unmistakable long-term warming trend.”
Risbey claims that the skeptics have lately relied on a naturally cool phase of the global cycle to fan doubts about climate change, the fact temperature records continue to fall even during a La-Nina dominated period is notable. Yet his argument reveals his own mistake – HELLO THERE ARE CYCLES. He boldly states that the temperature rising from the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere “is beginning to overwhelm the natural variability on even shorter decadal time scales”. Quite frankly, he lacks any historical evidence long-term to support any such conclusion. As long as people like this put out bogus research, they have a job. Without global warming theory, sorry, they need to find something else to scare people with to get a pay check for shallow research.

As long as this type of bogus research unfolds, government can justify taxing energy." Martin Armstrong

Edited by Russ, 10 September 2014 - 10:32 PM.

"Nulla tenaci invia est via" - Latin for "For the tenacious, no road is impossible".
"In order to master the markets, you must first master yourself" ... JP Morgan
"Most people lose money because they cannot admit they are wrong"... Martin Armstrong



http://marketvisions.blogspot.com/

#7 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 08:48 AM

Well , you are calling Martin Armstrong a moron, he is the guy if you bother to click the link above... that called AGM a fraud, after all Al Gore said all the ice in the Arctic would be gone by now and for that he got the Nobel Prize! Your tendency to label others who disagree with you as morons or low IQ is really objective.

Martin Armstrong??? You must be kidding. The ex-con pi-in-the-sky fraud is now trying to sell climate skeptic snake oil too??? Wow, you guys are more pathetically desperate that I could have imagined.

Psss, here's a hint: Risbey's work is about model validation; it is not about factual global warming. Again, the BEST study put to rest any doubt of global warming -


http://www.nytimes.c...ge-skeptic.html

The issue now is whether its anthropogenic or not. A lot of skeptics seem to be currently drawn to the theory of the lack of dino-farts combining with sun spot activity being the root cause of the warming.

Try to keep up.

Edited by salsabob, 11 September 2014 - 08:50 AM.

John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#8 Russ

Russ

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 7,204 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 11:06 AM

Well , you are calling Martin Armstrong a moron, he is the guy if you bother to click the link above... that called AGM a fraud, after all Al Gore said all the ice in the Arctic would be gone by now and for that he got the Nobel Prize! Your tendency to label others who disagree with you as morons or low IQ is really objective.

Martin Armstrong??? You must be kidding. The ex-con pi-in-the-sky fraud is now trying to sell climate skeptic snake oil too??? Wow, you guys are more pathetically desperate that I could have imagined.

Psss, here's a hint: Risbey's work is about model validation; it is not about factual global warming. Again, the BEST study put to rest any doubt of global warming -


http://www.nytimes.c...ge-skeptic.html

The issue now is whether its anthropogenic or not. A lot of skeptics seem to be currently drawn to the theory of the lack of dino-farts combining with sun spot activity being the root cause of the warming.

Try to keep up.



Lack of Dino Farts.... lol, you are such a serious guy. You posted a dead link too. Armstrong's pi cycle model is proven into the billions to one odds of it NOT being a coincidence btw. The fact is the temperature since 1998 has been going sideways to down and a 43% increase in polar ice over the past 2 years is an important trend which you prefer to dismiss.
"Nulla tenaci invia est via" - Latin for "For the tenacious, no road is impossible".
"In order to master the markets, you must first master yourself" ... JP Morgan
"Most people lose money because they cannot admit they are wrong"... Martin Armstrong



http://marketvisions.blogspot.com/

#9 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 03:46 PM

Well , you are calling Martin Armstrong a moron, he is the guy if you bother to click the link above... that called AGM a fraud, after all Al Gore said all the ice in the Arctic would be gone by now and for that he got the Nobel Prize! Your tendency to label others who disagree with you as morons or low IQ is really objective.

Martin Armstrong??? You must be kidding. The ex-con pi-in-the-sky fraud is now trying to sell climate skeptic snake oil too??? Wow, you guys are more pathetically desperate that I could have imagined.

Psss, here's a hint: Risbey's work is about model validation; it is not about factual global warming. Again, the BEST study put to rest any doubt of global warming -


http://www.nytimes.c...ge-skeptic.html

The issue now is whether its anthropogenic or not. A lot of skeptics seem to be currently drawn to the theory of the lack of dino-farts combining with sun spot activity being the root cause of the warming.

Try to keep up.



Lack of Dino Farts.... lol, you are such a serious guy. You posted a dead link too. Armstrong's pi cycle model is proven into the billions to one odds of it NOT being a coincidence btw. The fact is the temperature since 1998 has been going sideways to down and a 43% increase in polar ice over the past 2 years is an important trend which you prefer to dismiss.


1998 was the hottest year on record. But every year of the 2000s was warmer than the 1990 average.

The 1998 baseline cherry-picking by skeptics is exactly what the BEST study destroyed as any kind of intellectual argument. The only ones who hold onto it, well....
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#10 Russ

Russ

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 7,204 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 04:30 PM

Armstrong has worked with Sallie Baliunas the Astrophysicist that has done research into solar cycles, she pointed out there is a 300 year solar cycle that has a great influence on climate and Armstrong noted that just about every civilization in history has risen on fallen on this cycle, he thinks the Sun is responsible for the warming that happened in the end of the 20th century. The c02 levels continued to go up over the past 15 years but the temp did not of course, but you know all this stuff i am sure, if you want serious arguments there are site devoted to this subject, it is very complex, the computers didn't get it right so a single human brain is going to have a hard time it seems to me. As the polar ice grows it shall be interesting to see who is going to be right, whether the warming is going to reverse now or is it just a pause as the AGM believers think. Armstrong is also working with a couple of climate specialists and they are developing what he says will be superior climate model to anything else out there as it will have cycles programmed into it, but yeah i know you think he is a fraud and con artist. He has been very right about markets though and even politics, the cia wanted his model after it predicted the break up of the soviet union.
"Nulla tenaci invia est via" - Latin for "For the tenacious, no road is impossible".
"In order to master the markets, you must first master yourself" ... JP Morgan
"Most people lose money because they cannot admit they are wrong"... Martin Armstrong



http://marketvisions.blogspot.com/