Stanton Friedman - Show

[Kevin Daly]

I am still listening to the show and appreciated hearing Stanton's thoughts on the global warming farce. That whole scam has been exposed and gore should return his prizes, awards and profits gained from his bogus claims. He should also be held accountable for lying before Congress.

Um, no. There is no scam, it has been established beyond reasonable doubt by the overwhelming majority of scientists who actually work in this field, as opposed to people who used to be scientists in an unrelated field and now trot around reciting the same tired schtick to anyone who'll listen. All this bluster in your Congress about scams comes from people who depend for their big fat campaign donations (etc.) on those who are creating the problem, and are quite happy to make the world uninhabitable in pursuit of short-term profit.

 

[TClaeys]

I think that if the words "global warming" are ever typed into the Paracast forum at any time Pixelsmith suddenly gets this exclamation point over his head like in the cartoons.

The point here is not about global warming. It is about the repetitive declaration that "it is a scam" (or "the sky is falling") by people that are in no way experts in the field of climate. This is a big problem IMO. And it happens all too much. The power of influence is greater than truth. So we have all these people saying yeah or nay to something they no nothing about. But they do know how it affects their personal political beliefs. That's pretty much it. They want it to be a certain way so they go on long tirades offering up their opinion because they don't like the current solutions.

What we need is to keep science completely separated from politics. Unfortunately that is not possible. So the beat goes on. Now we are supposed to be swayed by thousands of highly educated people with PHDs because they signed some petition saying they thought global warming was a scam. These are smart people right?? But it just so happens that these people have PHDs in things like medicine, computer science, statistics, engineering and so on. So, ... how is this supposed to be logical again?? Maybe I should start taking medical advice from my local newsman. It's the same premise.

Does..... not...... compute

Without sounding like a diehard AWG proponent I will say that this happens on both sides of the "argument". I will also say that if we boiled down all the fat we would see that the people really relevant to the topic (climate experts) are all pretty much vested that humans are part of the "problem". I'm not saying there really is a problem or to what degree or what to do about it, .... just saying that nearly all of the climate researchers tell us this.

BTW just kidding Pixel, we all know how you feel.

 

[Hitech Lolife]

I don't want to wade into the greater debate over AGW as that's a matter for greater minds than my own. I am curious about Chris' (or was it Stan) claim that volcanic output of CO2 is greater than human output. I tried looking into it after hearing the show as it was an interesting point however there's no data that I can find that supports it.

Table 11.19 World Carbon Dioxide Emissions From Energy Consumption, 1998-2007 (Million Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide ) shows human output at around 29 billion metric tonnes for 2007.

Volcanic output estimated at ".. more than 130 million tonnes of CO₂ into the atmosphere every year" according to Volcanic Gases and Their Effects

The Eyjafjallajokull Volcano emitting 150-300,000 tonnes of CO2 daily: experts during it's erruption
Pintaubo in 1991 was estimated at 44 million.

I know there was an issue with .gov websites earlier in the thread, however are there any other organizations that exist to monitor such things? Where does the contradicting data come from?

I'm obviously missing something here as I do have faith in Stan and Chris (despite the off colour remark about proponents treating the issue 'religion', as though the debate was dead and buried when experts obviously still disagree).


Oh, UFOs? It was interesting, good to hear something new from Stan on how to approach things rather than trot out the same old flying-saucer/annoying alliteration spiel. Good job Paracast!

 

[SRL+]

Mr. Friedman's latest interview in my opinion was much better than the last, whether or not ( no pun intended ) global warming was discussed. I had truly thought he had "jumped the shark" in his last interview on the Paracast. Everyone really enjoys his upbeat approach to the phenomena. It seems as though he might be releasing his grip a little bit on the "nuts & bolts" aspect even though the "ranch" q & a was short lived. Mr. O'brien didn't seem as animated as usual, but that's where the self proclaimed " Professor of Ignorance" stepped in. It can be tough to ask the hard pointed questions to someone in which you admire. It's kinda like picking on your grandad. Understandably Mr. Friedman has a specific comfort zone and won't stray too far afield.

 

[ro2778]

It doesn't matter if human induced global warming is correct or not, there would still be a push for conservation in the West, for cleaner and more diverse energy supply and developing economies would seek to develop at the same pace. The factors influencing these areas are more heavily influenced by factors other than global warming therefore it's nice to know from a scientific perspective but really the public is far too emotional about the issue.

I enjoyed the show, I was interested to hear about the conference in Saudi Arabia and I'm looking forward to watching Majic Men, plus Battle LA this year.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

I had a hard time listening to the beginning of the show. Global warming is a misnomer. Climate change is what is happening. How much are humans causing it? That's the question. As usual, Skeptoid has a great article on it:

Heating Up to Global Warming

Take a look.

 

[pixelsmith]

Um, no. There is no scam, it has been established beyond reasonable doubt by the overwhelming majority of scientists who actually work in this field, as opposed to people who used to be scientists in an unrelated field and now trot around reciting the same tired schtick to anyone who'll listen. All this bluster in your Congress about scams comes from people who depend for their big fat campaign donations (etc.) on those who are creating the problem, and are quite happy to make the world uninhabitable in pursuit of short-term profit.

you sir with all due respect are full of BS. do one ounce of research and you will find out that there is NO majority of scientists who belive in the scam of AGW.

Please provide your source that tells you who these "majority of scientists who actually work in this field" really are.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

you sir with all due respect are full of BS. do one ounce of research and you will find out that there is NO majority of scientists who belive in the scam of AGW.

Please provide your source that tells you who these "majority of scientists who actually work in this field" really are.

Here, I'll help out:

Expert credibility in climate change — PNAS

Important quote:

Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate
researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i)
97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the
field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and
scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are
substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

 

[pixelsmith]

I had a hard time listening to the beginning of the show. Global warming is a misnomer. Climate change is what is happening. How much are humans causing it? That's the question. As usual, Skeptoid has a great article on it:

Heating Up to Global Warming

Take a look.

No, global warming is not really a misnomer, the globe warms. Global cooling happens as well. Some of the article is so laughable I could hardly read it. The quote below is just plain WRONG. CO2 levels are at almost the LOWEST levels in the history of the planet.

We know that there's more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than ever before.

The author is clearly a dumb ass.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

No, global warming is not really a misnomer, the globe warms. Global cooling happens as well. Some of the article is so laughable I could hardly read it. The quote below is just plain WRONG. CO2 levels are at almost the LOWEST levels in the history of the planet.


The author is clearly a dumb ass.

That's cool pixel. You don't have to agree with him. He's actually quite successful at what he does, and I find his podcast is quite informative.
So, since you get on your high horse about providing sources, where did you get your info that CO2 levels are at "almost the lowest in the history of the planet?" Thanks!

 

[pixelsmith]

Another dumb ass article. The IPCC is NOT credible. Do you know who they are, who their leader is? what his background is? what their mission statement is and how many people actually work at the IPCC?

Angelo get a clue. Research this another 8 years or so before you claim to know anything.

 

[pixelsmith]

So, since you get on your high horse about providing sources, where did you get your info that CO2 levels are at "almost the lowest in the history of the planet?" Thanks!

Observable historical data.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Observable historical data.

You really should cite the article that graph comes from so that people can see the source:

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

It isn't from a scientific journal.

 

[pixelsmith]

Here, I'll help out:

Expert credibility in climate change — PNAS

Important quote:

Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate
researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i)
97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the
field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and
scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are
substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

This paper is an embarrassment to the pro climate change crowd... how pathetic can a paper get?
Angelo did you even read it? It tries to measure credibility of climate scientists by counting how many papers they published and how often their work has been cited by other funded scientists. FUNDED being the operative word, todays climate scientists do not get funding unless the support the AGW hypothesis.
BTW- the late Steven Schneider was a eugenicist.

---------- Post added at 05:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:14 PM ----------

You really should cite the article that graph comes from so that people can see the source:

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

It isn't from a scientific journal.

And the IPCC is not a scientific body. And the leader of the IPCC is a Railroad engineer and also a soft porn writer. NICE! Love your "science source". Keep em coming.

 

[exo_doc]

So who the hell are we supposed to beleive?

Pixel has one source showing low co2,...and here's another show co2 insanely high:


Source:Wikimedia Error

The whole FU%$#@& thing has got me so pissed and frustrated because NO ONE seems to actually have ANY proof one way or another!!!!!!!
People, both pro and con, just scream and yell and call each other idiots and whine and moan and groan, and manage to cloud and ruin any data out there for the average person to make up thier own minds!

THAT right there tells me something is rotten, someone is covering something up, somewhere somehow by muddying the issue, and I really doubt it's the guys who stand to profit from global warming.

Is it any wonder people are just sick and tired of this shit?????

 

[Angel of Ioren]

This paper is an embarrassment to the pro climate change crowd... how pathetic can a paper get?
Angelo did you even read it? It tries to measure credibility of climate scientists by counting how many papers they published and how often their work has been cited by other funded scientists. FUNDED being the operative word, todays climate scientists do not get funding unless the support the AGW hypothesis.
BTW- the late Steven Schneider was a eugenicist.

---------- Post added at 05:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:14 PM ----------



And the IPCC is not a scientific body. And the leader of the IPCC is a Railroad engineer and also a soft porn writer. NICE! Love your "science source". Keep em coming.

You think it's all bullshit, fine. I think that what Al Gore said in his movie was inaccurate and alarmist - we can agree on that. However, the evidence points to humans having an effect on the climate, although not as large as some will have you believe and not as small as others would have you believe. That's where I stand.

 

[pixelsmith]

So who the hell are we supposed to beleive?

Pixel has one source showing low co2,...and here's another show co2 insanely high:


Source:Wikimedia Error

The whole FU%$#@& thing has got me so pissed and frustrated because NO ONE seems to actually have ANY proof one way or another!!!!!!!
People, both pro and con, just scream and yell and call each other idiots and whine and moan and groan, and manage to cloud and ruin any data out there for the average person to make up thier own minds!

THAT right there tells me something is rotten, someone is covering something up, somewhere somehow by muddying the issue, and I really doubt it's the guys who stand to profit from global warming.

Is it any wonder people are just sick and tired of this shit?????

Insanely high? dude we can only HOPE for CO2 levels to get back up in the 400 - 700 ppm range! can you imagine how much more vegetation (FOOD) those levels will support?
the average office cubicle or small home office is around 4000 ppm... why are you not dead?

---------- Post added at 05:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 PM ----------

You think it's all bullshit, fine. I think that what Al Gore said in his movie was inaccurate and alarmist - we can agree on that. However, the evidence points to humans having an effect on the climate, although not as large as some will have you believe and not as small as others would have you believe. That's where I stand.

you mean the evidence from a biased, non scientific, pro eugenics agency led by a porn writing railroad engineer?!? LMAO!!!

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Insanely high? dude we can only HOPE for CO2 levels to get back up in the 400 - 700 ppm range! can you imagine how much more vegetation (FOOD) those levels will support?
the average office cubicle or small home office is around 4000 ppm... why are you not dead?

---------- Post added at 05:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 PM ----------



you mean the evidence from a biased, non scientific, pro eugenics agency led by a porn writing railroad engineer?!? LMAO!!!

You've become my source of entertainment on this forum Pixel. Thank you.

 

[pixelsmith]

Insanely high? dude we can only HOPE for CO2 levels to get back up in the 400 - 700 ppm range! can you imagine how much more vegetation (FOOD) those levels will support?
the average office cubicle or small home office is around 4000 ppm... why are you not dead?

---------- Post added at 05:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 PM ----------



you mean the evidence from a biased, non scientific, pro eugenics agency led by a porn writing railroad engineer?!? LMAO!!!

do you realize how many extinction events have occurred in this planets history because of climate changes? To believe that the small amount of CO2 we humans contribute vs the naturally occurring amount is going to do ANYTHING at all is totally absurd.

---------- Post added at 05:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:49 PM ----------

You've become my source of entertainment on this forum Pixel. Thank you.

PLEASE post more of your sources... You really make my day when you do.

You have become the poster child of ignorance on this subject.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

do you realize how many extinction events have occurred in this planets history because of climate changes? To believe that the small amount of CO2 we humans contribute vs the naturally occurring amount is going to do ANYTHING at all is totally absurd.

---------- Post added at 05:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:49 PM ----------



PLEASE post more of your sources... You really make my day when you do.

You have become the poster child of ignorance on this subject.

Thanks. However, I don't think there's a point anymore.
You have proven that you are, by far, the most illuminated of all forum posters. You always know the truth. Keep up the good work.