Skip to comments.Time to stop arguing about climate change, World Bank says
Posted on 06/19/2013 6:59:23 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot
LONDON, June 19 (Reuters) - The world should stop arguing about whether humans are causing climate change and start taking action to stop dangerous temperature rises, the president of the World Bank said on Wednesday.
Kim Jim Yong Kim said there was 97 to 98 percent agreement among scientists that global warming was real and caused by human activity.
"If you disagree with the science of human-caused climate change you are not disagreeing that there is anthropogenic climate change. What you are disagreeing with is science itself," Kim told a Thomson Reuters newsmaker event in London.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Totally agree with you on this.
Government get out of the way!
Time to stop arguing about the world being flat - there is 97 - 98% agreement that if you sail to far you’ll fall off the edge.
I wonder if this greedy, money boy has any proof of this. I really doubt it. "97 to 98 percent". ROTFL. What a moron.
“Drop to your knees!”
“You will bow down and accept the Marxist world view of globull warming so we can gain greater power over your life. If you do not submit, it proves you do not worship the god of (false, political) science and you will be stoned to death!”
“There is no free will. You MUST accept globull warming!”
All hail globull warming and the benevolent Marxists espousing it.
100s of trillions of debt to be serviced. Tighten the chains. Tax them for the weather!
Alright I agree. Since there is no climate change, at least anthropomorphic climate change, let's stop arguing!
This is not about climate change or global warming. It is about money. The GD liberals want another avenue to steal from the productive and buy votes from the non-productive after deducting a portion for themselves.
So they don’t want to argue about causes?
“Now we want to spend unlimited amounts of money “repairing that damage”, instead of spending unlimited amounts of money on “prevention projects”.
What BS. Time to stop arguing LOL.
Science is not based on 97 to 98% consensus! Science is definitive.
The only solution is massive redistribution of wealth from developed nations to third-world cesspools.
The last two years here have been hot and very dry. People blame Glo-bull warming, but I’ve seen this before clear back to the 1950s.
Eight years ago summer was the coolest I can ever remember.
Now we are having another very cool and wet summer here.
Can we also blame it on glo-bull warming?
The more they insist the more I am rock solid sure they are lying to us. “Arguing with science itself” Oh please - true and good science has always relied on rigorous debate to hone it’s theories and by the presenting of other theories the original one may be raised or lowered in stature in comparison.
Anyone who silences scientific debate is certainly not in it for the science.
... start taking action to stop dangerous temperature rises...
Why the he!! do they think we are arguing? They are like typical liberals. They are so convinced they are right that they don’t think they need to argue. Interestingly, when they do try to argue they can’t support their position.
This is how you know that, though you are convinced you are right, you may be wrong. It is one of the self checks I do when debating. If I can’t argue my side in a way that a reasonable person can understand my position, just maybe my position is not supportable.
But most liberals are young and they have not reached taht mental level yet.
The 97% - 98% number comes from a recently published paper, here:
It has been thorroughly discredited here:
97 to 98 percent of all statistics are made up.
>> start taking action to stop dangerous temperature rises
Dangerous temperature rises... hmmm. I wonder where they’re writing from; *my* planet isn’t experiencing dangerous temperature rises.
Did they mention what color was the sky on their planet? That might help us figure out where the heck they think they are...
I’ll not only disagree with the “Lysenko” science of GCC, I would also tell the World Bank to Piss Off and tend to your stealing of other people’s money. Science advice from a “Bank”, yeah, sure.
The science is settled: the world is flat, the sun and planets revolve around the earth, the philosopher’s stone will turn lead to gold, the atom bomb will never work, man will never fly, man will never fly in space, disease is caused by bad humors, etc.
If you disagreed with Lysenko science then you ended up at best in a Gulag. Make no mistake, this is what these twits wish for as well.
43 degrees here in Southern Michigan when I got up this morning.
No action so far proposed by these guys will even theoretically stop the imaginary temperature rise. Their own models predict the draconian taxes and the regulation pushing us back 75 years will accomplish nothing.
Maybe the best strategy is to stop arguing about AGW and start focusing on the staggering costs and no benefits of their proposals. Paint picutes of the nighmare world THEY would create with theire proposals.
Time to stop arguing....cause we’re losing
Unfortunately for them, we are in this for the whole game.
I stand with the 31,000 plus.
If we only had these leaders around thousands of years ago, we might still be blessed with the Ice Age!
If the science is complete then why are we still funding it???
The critics of anthropogenic global warming make the issue a bit of a conundrum for many, as mentioned in the linked article: “A study last month found that 97 percent of around 4,000 scientific reports giving an opinion about the cause of climate change since the 1990s said it was mainly human. Sceptics said the survey wrongly omitted thousands of papers which did not give a view.” (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/19/worldbank-climate-idUSL2N0EU1C20130619?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologySector&rpc=43)
IOW, skeptics still believe the earlier world-class error of omission is in place. Those who go along with data gleaned by alleged cherry-picking are adamant that earth will get too hot to handle, and have postponed the flood dates for coastlines worldwide. Have they considered that if the data is not founded in the solid rock of truth, our steps to cool earth down could, based on false data, bring glaciers to the tropics if a 3-degree drop registers due to combining with other natural drops.
Truth may be confusing for a general public that sees a press eager to make heroes of this concocted presentation that nags at even those who realize it’s concocted. Who didn’t have a good teacher who said “If you see a piece of trash laying around, put your gloves on and put it in a receptacle and the world will be a better place because of you.”?
Environmentalism nags us to do the right thing, but if facts become skewed, we still feel loyalty to “doing that right thing” of fixing something. It’s clear the scientific community is not being up-front about the true facts with so many of them omitted from their studies by which they are dictating demands for public action.
In the big picture, the omissions have led to a conundrum of the public. Acting based on misleading evidence could be just as disastrous as doing nothing if anthropogenic global warming had been the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Unfortunately, we haven’t that assurance. I hope the World Bank head reexamines his.
Exactly! If they were right, if they were winning, they wouldn't have to cherry-pick data, prevent critics from publishing and use "Mike's nature trick".
I am 100% in agreement. We need to do something about Global Warming.
However in saying that, I only have a couple of simple questions that I need answered by the scientific community.
What if your calculations are incorrect and you cool the earth too much? What are your mitigation plans?
Exactly how much CO2 has to be removed from the atmosphere for us to get to an optimum temperature?
What is the plan for ensuring the correct climate change happens across the entire world?
How much is this going to cost?
So these 1000’s of scientists all got together, said there is a problem yet the only solution is to give the Communists money.
Here is my solution. Plant life eats CO2. Basically we need more plants. Therefore, first thing is clear cut old growth forests to prevent burning additional burning which creates CO2. Sorry Sierra Club.
Next thing is to grow crops throughout the world. Build desalinization plants and turn the dessert into paradise. Worked in Israel. Build them all along the African coastline and turn the Middle East and Africa into the worlds largest farm. Plenty of jobs, new economies and at the same time saving the world.
Just did the scientists jobs for them.
[[Time to stop arguing about climate change, World Bank says]]
NOONE is arguing abotu it but you con artists- the rest of us know for a fact it’s been nothign but a scam from the very beginning to extort money from people- the alarmists have been caught tiem and again LYING abotu the data, and then coverign up their LIES- so yeah- it’s time alright- only it’s tiome for the alarmists and scam artists to STOP LYING- and let peopel get o nwith hteir lives and not have to feel guiklty abotu soemthign they ARE NOT CAUSING
The best response to this would be the headline, “World Bank president Kim Jim Yong Kim destroys the already minimal credibility of the World Bank, by embracing One World Government.”
A topic we agree 100% on. :D
[[Science is not based on 97 to 98% consensus! Science is definitive]]
There was an article yesterday on FR showign htat they LIED abotu that figure too- they conducted a ‘survey’ of scientists and asked the question in such a way so that no matter how the person responded, they coudl chalk it up to an ‘I agree man is to blame’ answer-
But all of htis is moot- the administration coudl care less what the truth is- they AFRE goign to make everyoen pay for soemthign they aren’t causing because it means an unlimitted uninteruppted cash flow into hte govenrment that noone can escape from- they are STEALING our money based on false pretenses and they coudl care less that we know they are crooks and liars- they are criminal thugs- plain and simple-
imagien IF a group of thugs walked into stores all over htis coutnry and said “Your store is causing the moon to shift which ‘may eventually’ put us all in danger, and thus we are goign to take 30% of your income because you are ‘ruining the heavens’ with your business” That woudl be called extortion, and extortion is ILLEGAL- yet our govenrment is gettign away with it (We’re ALREADY payign back door ‘carbon taxes’ inthat the ‘president’ is quietly tackign on higher taxes for energy consuming devices and chaerging busiensses higher taxes with greater environmental restrictions whgich raises the prices for everyone)
[[Can we also blame it on glo-bull warming?]]
No matter which way the wind blows- hot or cold- they will ALWAYS blame it on man and claim ‘;thsi was predicted years ago- our computer models indicated it might get ‘colder/hotter’ whichever the case may be- I’ve seen them switch positions so rapidly and so many times you can’t tell which way they are leanign any logner-
Time to stop listening to the World Banksters.
There are thousands of "scientists" who deny that a fetus is alive to protect the legality of infanticide known as abortion.
I'd believe there are thousands of corrupt scientists. I've heard people try to decide between being a doctor or a lawyer. Both decisions seem to be financially driven, not skills based. And we know that lawyers are dishonest a$$holes.
[[Anyone who silences scientific debate is certainly not in it for the science]]
The folsk who are fightign the ‘man-caused global warming’ criminals NEED to make htis hteir mantra- and hammer it home, takign out ads and plasterign hte airwaves with it- State that because the alarmists can’t prove their case, they are declarign hte case over with, and claiming victory because that is the only way they can win their case- by LYING- point out hte lies they’ve made, and state very clearly “That is NOT how science is done- these folsk are beign anti-science by tryign to shut down thsoe hwo have evidence provign that man is NOT causing cliamte change”
There are a few fighting the alarmists- however, the effort isn’t big enough or powerful enough- the ONLY thing these alarmist creeps understand is soemone standign up to them and smackign htem right back- just liek our dear leader- when the right FINALLY sort of stood up to him i nregards to nsa, beghazi, spying etc- he craweld into a protective shell and hid
Peopel keeps saying ‘oh we can’t be mean (whatever that means? Slamming someone who NEEDS to be slammed with hte truth is NOT beign mean- infact it is doing a duty- it is NOT allowign htem to live i ntheir ignorance any logner- you are infact HELPING them by slapping them out of their hysteria and stupified drunkeness- thus makign htem better people) and that we ‘can’t stoop to their level’ and ‘we must take hte high road and be polite’
BS- We are NOT being impolite by presentign htem with hte cold hard facts- we are doign them a disservice when we don’t fight them effectively enough to snap them out of their criminal ways-
[[They dont even realize how stupid they sound. In essence, they are saying if you disagree with us, stop arguing and just do what we say.]]
That’s EXACTLY what nancy peelosi said when she said about dearl eader’s death panel health care package “you’ll just ghave to pass it in order to see what’s in it- you’re gonna love it- trust me”
“dammit, we want our vig on this and we want it now!”
[[Dangerous temperature rises... hmmm. I wonder where theyre writing from; *my* planet isnt experiencing dangerous temperature rises.]]
Yes, we saw fisrt hand how dangerous the tempurature rises were when the ice age lifted thanks to NATURALLY LOCCURING climate change- as the miles thick glaciers coverign America receecded leavign hte great lakes- lfie ceased to exist- all animals perished- peopel were wiped out all over the planet- the whole globe turned into a dust bowl, water dried yup everywhere- (except i nthe oceans of course, which inexplicably rose 30 feet and flooded everythign, drownign and destroyign everythign in it’;s path out just like al gore predicted)
oh wait- no they weren’t- life survived just fine- not just once, but serveral times as cliamte change has been cosntantly happening sicne the earth’s creation
[[Even assuming AGW is real, it completely escapes me how redistributing money from rich nations (where better technology is more likely to be invented) to third world nations (where they still burn dung) could in any way alleviate global warming.]
The pwoers that be ‘claim’ that givign poor coutnries money will allow them to build cleaner more ecologically sensitive plants, equipp homes with more efficient cleaner devices etc- however, we know damn well NONE of this iwll make even the slightest bit of difference because man’s total contribution to atmospheric CO2 is a scant 0.004% and that nature naturally takes care of CO2 levels and always has, and always will- the rest of the CO2 i nthe atmosphere, the 99.996% is caused by NATURAL MEANS- which means we are NOT the ones causign hte CO2 riuse i nthe atmosphere-
The fact is that CO2 doesn’t even cause cliamte change- cliamte change causes a rise in CO2- when the globe warms, CO2 rises 100’s of years later as ice melts and oceans warm and the CO2 gets released into atmosphere- when it cools again, the CO2 drops back into ice and oceans- and all this is proven by ice core samples (which incidently REFUTE the alarmist’s claims 100%- ooops excuse me, I meant 99.996%)
Climate change causes a rise in CO2- man and nature spewign out CO2 does NOT cause cliamte change- thsi is backed up by scientific fact- but hte pwoers that be are relyign o ntheir ability to suppress these FACTS and their ability to manipulate the low info voters-
Hell- they aren’t even relyign on that any logner- they simpyl don’t care what the public says- the ‘debate is over’ and they say ‘everyoen can just shut the hell up because we are goign to tax you whether youl ike it or not regardkless of what hte evidence proves’
[[After all, IF all this cash actually improves the economy of the receiving nations, wouldn’t the world wide energy demand go up?]]
That’s an excellent point- but you can’t talk logic to thieves and crooks- gthey don’t care what the eivdence and posible outcomes will be- they ARE goign to tax us for carbon output- period-
First off, who says the status quo is the optimum temperature, anyway?
Imagine orange groves in Saskatoon, for instance, unfettered access to the Northwest Passage to reduce shipping travel (and fuel burned), How much lower heating bills would be in say, North Dakota.
The potential is incredible---why Greenland could be GREEN! Imagine an ecowhacko who couldn't support that!
Of course, all the limousine liberals with beachfront property would have to relocate, but that would be a small price to pay for "sustainability"!
Will the World Bank require its grandees to travel in “Coach Class” as they jet around the world?
Then the “crisis” isn’t REAL, is it?
If global warming is such a threat, they should bicycle.