Top 10 Global Warming Lies That May Shock You

Interesting read that debunks the AGW propoganda.

"EDF has assembled what it believes to be the 10 most powerful global warming assertions in the alarmists’ playbook, yet each assertion either backfires on alarmists or has been proven false. While reading how flawed EDF’s assertions are, remember these are the very best arguments global warming alarmists can make. Open-minded readers should have very little difficulty dismissing the mythical global warming crisis after examining the top 10 assertions in the alarmist playbook.

Alarmist Assertion #1

“Bats Drop from the Sky – In 2014, a scorching summer heat wave caused more than 100,000 bats to literally drop dead and fall from the sky in Queensland, Australia.”

The Facts

Global warming alarmists’ preferred electricity source – wind power – kills nearly 1 million bats every year (to say nothing of the more than 500,000 birds killed every year) in the United States alone. This appalling death toll occurs every year even while wind power produces just 3% of U.S. electricity. Ramping up wind power to 10, 20, or 30% of U.S. electricity production would likely increase annual bat kills to 10-to-30 million every year. Killing 30 million bats every year in response to dubious claims that global warming might once in a great while kill 100,000 bats makes no sense.





Just as importantly, alarmists present no evidence that global warming caused the summer heat wave in a notoriously hot desert near the equator. To the contrary, climate change theory and objective data show our recent global warming is occurring primarily in the winter, toward the poles, and at night.

Australia’s highest recorded temperature occurred more than half a century ago, and only two of Australia’s seven states have set their all-time temperature record during the past 40 years. Indeed, Queensland’s 2014 heat wave paled in comparison to the 1972 heat wave that occurred 42 years of global warming ago. If global warming caused the 2014 Queensland heat wave, why wasn’t it as severe as the 1972 Queensland heat wave? Blaming every single summer heat wave or extreme weather event on global warming is a stale and discredited tactic in the alarmist playbook. Objective science proves extreme weather events such as hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, and droughts have become less frequent and less severe as a result of the Earth’s recent modest warming."

One down nine to go, check it out.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamest...warming-lies-that-may-shock-you/#537cea7b53a5

 

Pine beetles.. Poster child for liberal forestry management indifference. Why do we have pine beetles? Because they are non native, and the tree hugging world said we can't cut out or otherwise manage the trees in the forest. So, we had millions of acres of dead trees in the west. Of course, all those dead trees burn, and whoosh, fires, caused by... liberals.

 

Bats dying of heat is not even in the top 100 of "best arguments about global warming." Your entire thread is a failure from the start.

 

Any thoughts on the other 9 contained in the link in the OP, or was your drive by the best you could do?

 

I didn't bother reading the link, because the first example was so completely off base. Life is too short to read ignorant propaganda.

If you think there's a valid point in there somewhere, post it and I'll respond.

 

So just a drive by from the Troll Lane.

Got it.

It's not my OP. The valid information is in the link.

You've already proved you're not interested, so please don't ask me to waste my time.

 

Way to keep those blinders on

 

Dude!

You think NASA is a huge conspiracy theory on global climate change. Shouldn't that be #1 ?

 

Exactly.

But the poster did see enough to throw a grenade while passing by. Too bad it didn't make it out of the car....

 

So the poster highlights one of 10 claims. That one claim is ridiculously stupid, and I point it out. Assuming that claim is representative, I don't bother reading the link because life is too short to read 9 more ridiculously stupid claims. And that means I'm keeping my blinders on?

But fine. I ask you to highlight a point you think is valid, and I promise to respond. You apparently can't find a valid point in the linked article, thus proving my point.

 

Obviously you are afraid to read the other nine or maybe reading is just hard for you and what takes the rest of us two minutes takes you two hours.

 

And you are STILL unable to highlight a claim from your article that you think can withstand scrutiny better than the one in your OP.

 

Well let's start with the one you did manage to read and the following info in it. How do you blow this off exactly?


"Australia’s highest recorded temperature occurred more than half a century ago, and only two of Australia’s seven states have set their all-time temperature record during the past 40 years. Indeed, Queensland’s 2014 heat wave paled in comparison to the 1972 heat wave that occurred 42 years of global warming ago. If global warming caused the 2014 Queensland heat wave, why wasn’t it as severe as the 1972 Queensland heat wave?"

 

I pointed out that your claim that this is "alarmist's best assertions" is nonsense. I'll add that the existence of heat waves in the past doesn't prove or disprove anything related to global warming. You have to look at overall trendlines. And the overall trendline for Australia, as with the world, is warming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clima...Climate_history_based_on_instrumental_records

 

It was the first one in the article, labeled 1. There was an assumption, given the link, that someone wanting to add to the discussion would follow that link to the other 9.

However, you've proven what you're capable of adding to the discussion.

 

So your so called "scrutiny" is a quick run to wiki? Fact remains you can't deny that it was hotter in Australia forty years ago so the recent and much touted by alarmist as evidence of AGW heatwave their proves nothing and your assertion that the rest of the link isn't worth reading is a fail. Way to keep those blinders on.

Now let's go to another part of the OP you managed to read through squinted eyes.

"Global warming alarmists’ preferred electricity source – wind power – kills nearly 1 million bats every year (to say nothing of the more than 500,000 birds killed every year) in the United States alone. This appalling death toll occurs every year even while wind power produces just 3% of U.S. electricity. Ramping up wind power to 10, 20, or 30% of U.S. electricity production would likely increase annual bat kills to 10-to-30 million every year. Killing 30 million bats every year in response to dubious claims that global warming might once in a great while kill 100,000 bats makes no sense."

How is that "off base"? Can I expect more "scrutiny" from wiki? LOL

Here, before you run to wiki.....

"According to a study in the Wildlife Society Bulletin, every year 573,000 birds (including 83,000 raptors) and 888,000 bats are killed by wind turbines — 30 percent higher than the federal government estimated in 2009, due mainly to increasing wind power capacity across the nation. This is likely an underestimate because these estimates were based on 51,630 megawatts of installed wind capacity in the United States in 2012 and wind capacity has grown since then to 65,879 megawatts. And, at one solar power plant in California, an estimated 3,500 birds died in just the plant’s first year of operation.[ii]

Over the past five years, about 2.9 million birds were killed by wind turbines. That compares to about 800,000 birds that a Mother Jones Blog estimated to have been killed by the BP oil spill that occurred in April 2010[iii]—5 years ago–despite not all of them showing visible signs of oil.[1] Nevertheless, BP was fined $100 million for killing and harming migratory birds due to that oil spill. In comparison, the nation’s wind turbines killed more than 3 times the number of birds than did the BP oil spill over the past 5 years. And, wind turbines routinely kill federally protected birds and eagles.

Since the study estimating bird and bat deaths was completed based on 2012 wind capacity data, U.S. companies have installed more wind power due to federal and state incentives such as the Production Tax Credit that provides 2.3 cents per kilowatt hour of wind generated power over the first ten years of operation. Since 2012, the United States added over 14,000 megawatts of additional wind capacity with total wind capacity at 65,879 megawatts as of the end of 2014 — 16 times higher than wind capacity in 2001.[iv]"


https://www.instituteforenergyresea...-kill-wind-and-solar-decimate-birds-and-bats/

And before you cry FAKE NEWS from oil lobby.



"The Wildlife Society Bulletin is a journal for wildlife practitioners that effectively integrates cutting edge science with management and conservation, and also covers important policy issues, particularly those that focus on the integration of science and policy. Wildlife Society Bulletin includes articles on contemporary wildlife management and conservation, education, administration, law enforcement, and review articles on the philosophy and history of wildlife management and conservation."


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/19385463

 

If you think a single hot summer 40 years ago somehow proves global warming isn't real, you don't understand what "global warming" means.

I gave you a link to the trend line for Australia. Please look at that chart and try to claim that Australia's average temperature was hotter 40 years ago.

The number of bats (or birds) killed by wind power is completely irrelevant to a discussion of global warming. It neither proves nor disproves that warming is occurring.

It's sort of relevant to a discussion of wind power, but as a side effect, not a main argument.

The side discussion focuses around mitigating such effects -- for instance, idling wind turbines at low wind speeds, because that's when the turbines are least economical and bats are most active. Doing so could reduce bat mortality by 90 percent.

Meanwhile, global warming threatens many bat species -- as with many other animals -- with wholesale extinction, due to climate-related habitat change, disruption of food cycles, etc.

So even if you want to say "wind turbines are bad because they kill bats", global warming is likely a bigger threat. So wind turbines are better for bats than doing nothing.

 

Prove it and prove man causes it. Talk is cheap. Copy and paste of a wiki biased article is not proof of anything.

 

Forbes is not a scientific journal. Some guy cherry picked NASA articles when I can probably find the exact opposite said by NASA itself.

Besides, you don't like NASA, remember? You're a zealot and a hypocrite, nothing more. Oh, and I've already shown you experiments involving greenhouse gasses, but you, well, have blinders for reproducible experiments...

 

Cherry picked all 10 lies?

"When debate is lost slander becomes the tool of the loser"

 

Global warming threatens mass extinctions. That's simply a fact.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scie...erate-earths-sixth-mass-extinction-180955138/

You have just moved the goalposts. Do you now concede that the claims in your OP have the following problems?

1. Bat deaths are not even close to a "best" argument about global warming;
2. The number of bats killed by wind power is irrelevant to a discussion about whether global warming exists, and whether humans are causing it.
3. A heat wave 40 years ago does not prove or disprove global warming. However, the trend line for Australia clearly shows a sharp increase in warming over the last several decades.

Please concede those points before we continue, or provide a specific counterargument to any of them.

 

So you admit nothing in lie number one is wrong. Not a single fact.
Well let's turn that around for just one of your points.
A recent heatwave does not prove or disprove AGW.
Please concede that point and then you will see that lie number one is proven.

Next we can move to lie number two but you will have to read it first.

 

I have been instructed by the mods to to report such post instead of react to them. Have a nice day

 

Should I report your post for calling me slanderous?

 

Feel free