IPCC Reaches A Tipping Point

The IPCC has now completely disconnected with science, and its sole purpose for existence is to maintain funding and give totalitarian politicians an excuse to destroy freedom and free markets.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to IPCC Reaches A Tipping Point

  1. Fast Eddie says:

    Unfortunately we are dominated by an ignorant base too busy sucking on the guvmint teet to actually look at and understand what is going on.

  2. Andy DC says:

    Their purpose is to create enough hysteria, guilt and fear that we willingly give them access to our wallets.

  3. Glacierman says:

    It was over when the left took over education.

    • No, that’s just when it became a full-fledged war, between tyranny and individual freedom.

    • Eric Simpson says:

      Yes. Maybe not completely over, as there remains a fight between tyranny and individual freedom, and we are all fighters, but when the left insidiously ingratiated themselves into the the educational system, often with the assent of old time establishment conservatives like GHWB and probably even the EPA founding Richard Nixon, when the left got it’s myriad tentacles into education, it laid the foundation for today’s msm that rubber stamps whatever the ipcc says and for a population that is quick to accept the de-development goals of agw but could care less whether the “science” is correct.

  4. Justa Joe says:

    The acronym IPCC should always be proceded by “UN“. Maybe then more people will understand who these people are.

  5. scizzorbill says:

    Was the IPCC ever connected to science?

  6. James Anderson says:

    driven

  7. Dave says:

    Debate in science should never be about the theories, only the implications of “scientific results”:

    It is time to restore the role of science to a respected place and reserve debate for understanding the implications of scientific results, and therefore appropriate policy to address the challenges and opportunities revealed by science. Not to do so would be tantamount to a toreador turning his back on a raging bull.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/03/opinion/let-science-set-the-facts.html?src=rechp

  8. GregO says:

    Defund the UN IPCC. Kill it.

    http://opinion.financialpost.com/2013/09/30/ipcc-climate-global-warming/

    From the article:
    “As a result, we’ve lost a generation of climate dynamicists. We have been focused on climate models rather than on climate dynamics and theory that is needed to understand the effects of the sun on climate, the network of natural internal variability on multiple time scales, the mathematics of extreme events, and the predictability of a complex system characterized by spatio-temporal chaos.”

  9. Chewer says:

    They may need more funding to understand what goes on with the two oceans connected to the AO and north pole, along with what the happenings are with the three oceans connected to the southern pole and Antarctic Stream…
    Since they’ve blown off the sun and its effects within the 1700 kilometers above our surface and dissed any contributions from planetary core differential max-min temperatures & pressures, they must find the missing heat or hope like hell for the MEI to produce a 1983 or 1998 style El Nino.
    If they can’t come up with a better solution (to their problem), it might be time for them to spend a little one on one time with Gyro Jerry in the prison cell -:) If they think their hemorrhoids are hurting now, just wait till Gyro is done with them -:)

  10. Climatism says:

    Reblogged this on CACA and commented:
    “For a lot of people including the bureaucracy in Government and the environmental movement, the issue is power. It’s hard to imagine a better leverage point than carbon dioxide to assume control over a society. It’s essential to the production of energy, it’s essential to breathing. If you demonise it and gain control over it, you so-to-speak, control everything. That’s attractive to people. It’s been openly stated for over forty years that one should try to use this issue for a variety of purposes, ranging from North/South redistribution, to energy independence, to God knows what…”
    —–
    “CO² for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.”
    http://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/08/28/bureaucratic-dioxide/

  11. Andy Oz says:

    Correctamundo!
    It was always about money and lots of it. Fortunately here in Oz, we are in the process of putting salt on the leech and sending it onwards.
    http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/2011/07/global-wealth-redistribution-proven-treasury-modelling.html

Leave a Reply to harrydhuffman (@harrydhuffman) Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s