Quote:Former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan wants you to eat more insects. Why? It’s better for the environment and your health, he argues.

“Keeping meat consumption to levels recommended by health authorities would lower emissions and reduce heart disease, cancer, and other diseases,” Annan told The Guardian Sunday.

“And of course there are alternative sources of protein. For example, raising insects as an animal protein source,” Annan said. “Insects have a very good conversion rate from feed to meat. They make up part of the diet of two billion people and are commonly eaten in many parts of the world.”

http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/04/kofi-a...l-warming/

On the Global Warming front...

Satellite data shows that the Arctic ice cap has GROWN 43% since 2012



Another global alarming alarmist myth bites the dust.

Quote:The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. ‘The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff,’ he said. ‘It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.’

Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change.

But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.

To put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, America’s biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice.

The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by Nasa. These reveal that – while the long-term trend still shows a decline – last Monday, August 25, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15 per cent ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometres.

This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006, and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years – an impressive 43 per cent.

Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise – from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometres.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...E-now.html

Any suggestions on what Kofi can go eat?

(05-05-2015 10:09 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Any suggestions on what Kofi can go eat?

Waygu beef and Chateau Margaux 2009 while flying on a Gulfstream, of coures. Eating insects and living sustainably are for the little people.

Eating insects as a main source of protein would be incredibly inefficient.

Bugs are fine to eat if you are on some sort of culinary adventure in Africa or some other place where bugs are traditionally part of the menu. I once spent an hour eating ants in Australia, ants that spend their time gorging on citrus fruits. They were like explosions of limes and were very tasty.

(05-05-2015 09:40 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  On the Global Warming front...

Satellite data shows that the Arctic ice cap has GROWN 43% since 2012



Another global alarming alarmist myth bites the dust.

Quote:The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. ‘The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff,’ he said. ‘It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.’

Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change.

But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.

To put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, America’s biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice.

The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by Nasa. These reveal that – while the long-term trend still shows a decline – last Monday, August 25, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15 per cent ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometres.

This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006, and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years – an impressive 43 per cent.

Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise – from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometres.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...E-now.html

2012 was the minimum of the Arctic ice cap. Just because 2014 had more ice does not mean that the ice cap isn't decreasing. It very much is.

Does this prove global warming by itself? Not really.
Was Al Gore right to make such an alarmist statement? Nope.

Once again someone bastardizes statistics to lie about climate change to prove a point for their agenda. Both sides do this all the time and it's pathetic.

I'd like to see Kofi Annan take his own advice. Chance of that happening is 0%. Just another, "Do as I say, not as I do" idiot.

(05-05-2015 11:17 AM)ODUgradstudent Wrote:  Once again someone bastardizes statistics to lie about climate change to prove a point for their agenda. Both sides do this all the time and it's pathetic.

....how they keep their funding.

Kofi and Michelle should get together and encourage schools to add these delicacies to the school lunch program.

Oh by the way

Malia and Sasha will be dining on this for lunch

(05-05-2015 11:56 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 11:17 AM)ODUgradstudent Wrote:  Once again someone bastardizes statistics to lie about climate change to prove a point for their agenda. Both sides do this all the time and it's pathetic.

....how they keep their funding.

And on the flip side how certain websites get their traffic and how both parties get their votes.

Let's not pretend that only one side has an agenda.

Scientists: Yeah, we made up polar bear numbers to ‘Satisfy Public Demand’



Hey remember all those bleak polar bear numbers and predictions that were used get everyone on board the global warming train? Well, it turns out that those numbers weren’t exactly accurate.

Quote:This may come as a shocker to some, but scientists are not always right — especially when under intense public pressure for answers.

Researchers with the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) recently admitted to experienced zoologist and polar bear specialist Susan Crockford that the estimate given for the total number of polar bars in the Arctic was “simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand.”

…PBSG’s admission also comes after academics and government regulators have touted their polar bear population estimates to show that polar bear numbers have grown since the 1960s. PBSG estimates have also been used to show that polar bear populations have stabilized over the last 30 years.

Polar bear populations became the centerpiece of the effort to fight global warming due to claims that melting polar ice caps would cause the bears to become endangered in the near future. Years ago, some scientists predicted the Arctic would be virtually ice free by now.

Polar bears became the first species listed under the Endangered Species Act because they could potentially be harmed by global warming. But some recent studies have found that some polar bear subpopulations have actually flourished in recent years.

“So, the global estimates were… ‘simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand’

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/30/scient...ic-demand/

(05-05-2015 12:08 PM)ODUgradstudent Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 11:56 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 11:17 AM)ODUgradstudent Wrote:  Once again someone bastardizes statistics to lie about climate change to prove a point for their agenda. Both sides do this all the time and it's pathetic.

....how they keep their funding.

And on the flip side how certain websites get their traffic and how both parties get their votes.

Let's not pretend that only one side has an agenda.

If trying to defeat the other side's agenda, is an agenda, than yeah, you're right.

(05-05-2015 12:20 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 12:08 PM)ODUgradstudent Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 11:56 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 11:17 AM)ODUgradstudent Wrote:  Once again someone bastardizes statistics to lie about climate change to prove a point for their agenda. Both sides do this all the time and it's pathetic.

....how they keep their funding.

And on the flip side how certain websites get their traffic and how both parties get their votes.

Let's not pretend that only one side has an agenda.

If trying to defeat the other side's agenda, is an agenda, than yeah, you're right.

So begins the cycle.

EXCELSIOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If your argument is that for research, money talks, who's out bidding these guys?



Six of the top seven largest companies in the world are oil and gas. I'm not saying they're evil or nefarious, but thems the facts.

The reason Global! Warming! Alarmists! have to fudge their data and shift from tree rings to temperature readings to global ice measurements to lack of / too much etc etc etc to make their models work is because we don’t have reliable data from a long-enough time period to draw honest conclusions or propose sensible solutions.

Good science always points to the results, not the consensus. But instead of good science, it’s just some claim like “Typhoons are more numerous and more powerful than ever and will get worse and more powerful!! For proof you get “uh, hello, Typhoon Hayain, Science! denying wingnut! You’re ‘Teh’ Stupid!11!ty. Then you get something along the line of "Of course there are fewer typhoons, the ocean is absorbing heat which means global warming is real."

The vast majority of not Global! Warming! Alarmists! do not reject the underlying science of global warming, but more so believe that many of the policies put forward or suggested to address the problem will lead to unacceptable levels of economic hardship. Economic hardship for which namely that there is ZERO evidence that the “cure” will work!

For instance, Global! Warming! Alarmists! have gotten the government to “invest” billions in “green energy” scams that can not and will not in the foreseeable future ever address our society’s base power needs, nor address any potential rise in temperature.

(And the numerous scandals regarding how the evidence has been generated and presented do little to change this view.)

(05-05-2015 01:52 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The reason Global! Warming! Alarmists! have to fudge their data and shift from tree rings to temperature readings to global ice measurements to lack of / too much etc etc etc to make their models work is because we don’t have reliable data from a long-enough time period to draw honest conclusions or propose sensible solutions.

Good science always points to the results, not the consensus. But instead of good science, it’s just some claim like “Typhoons are more numerous and more powerful than ever and will get worse and more powerful!! For proof you get “uh, hello, Typhoon Hayain, Science! denying wingnut! You’re ‘Teh’ Stupid!11!ty. Then you get something along the line of "Of course there are fewer typhoons, the ocean is absorbing heat which means global warming is real."

The vast majority of not Global! Warming! Alarmists! do not reject the underlying science of global warming, but more so believe that many of the policies put forward or suggested to address the problem will lead to unacceptable levels of economic hardship. Economic hardship for which namely that there is ZERO evidence that the “cure” will work!

For instance, Global! Warming! Alarmists! have gotten the government to “invest” billions in “green energy” scams that can not and will not in the foreseeable future ever address our society’s base power needs, nor address any potential rise in temperature.

(And the numerous scandals regarding how the evidence has been generated and presented do little to change this view.)

K.

Quote:Six of the top seven largest companies in the world are oil and gas. I'm not saying they're evil or nefarious, but thems the facts.

Thank goodness. These countries are helping retirees live decent lives. For example, a portfolio that includes: Exon Mobil (dividend 3.28%), Royal Dutch Shell (5.9%), Chevron (3.95%), goes a long way.