May 30, 2016

By letting Alberta burn for a month, Trudeau has “created more CO2 than all 100 oilsands companies COMBINED”

Rebel Staff
 

Yesterday, 300 firefighters from South Africa landed at the airport in Edmonton. It was quite a sight.

They're here because, one month later, the wildfire is still burning out of control in northern Alberta. It’s actually crossed into Saskatchewan too. It’s still huge — 580,000 hectares, which is 1.4 million acres.

It’s shocking to learn that things are still so bad we need help from the other side of the world.

So, thanks to the firefighters from South Africa.

But here’s something interesting:

Did you know that every acre of forest fire in Fort McMurray emits about five tons of carbon dioxide, according to Environment Canada?

So 1.4 million acres have burned so far. That’s seven million tons, or seven megatons of carbon dioxide — in just one month.

And did you know that the entire oilsands, all 100 companies, working all year, only puts out about six megatons per month.

So by letting this forest fire burn, because he’s too stupid or too proud or too anti-Alberta to have let in firefighting help for so long, Trudeau’s policies have actually created more CO2 than all the oilsands companies combined.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-06-02 19:31:41 -0400
KOKES: That university again????
commented 2016-06-02 10:18:12 -0400
“Rick Plesnik commented 14 hours ago
Ignore Mr jokes (kokes). His CBC paymasters will dump him once they realize he cannot influence commentators on this site!”

Nice attempt to muddy the facts Ricky. Truth be known, I am a red conservative and with exception of the anti-climate change Neanderthal thinkers, I agree wholeheartedly with the conservative platform. I just believe that the intellectuals in this country and the new voters (18+) may not vote for the conservative party if they hold to the false belief that global warming is a myth. Again, such Neanderthal thinking does not serve the party well and any poll on that issue will be a big red flag to contend with.

Speaking of ill-informed Neanderthals, Oats must have slept in due to the tossing and turning he experienced all night long in the humiliating pimp slapping he got from me yesterday. How embarrassing for him! I bet he thought he was a hero to you Neanderthal thinkers but now there is the reality that he was WRONG. And fools like you Ricky have followed him like lemmings, right off the cliff into stubborn denial. Too funny and how embarrassing it must be for the rest of you foolish believers/followers. Simply put, you cannot dispute logic. And logic based on science is like holding a poker hand of aces high. One cannot lose any discussion on that notion.
commented 2016-06-01 19:42:26 -0400
Ignore Mr jokes (kokes). His CBC paymasters will dump him once they realize he cannot influence commentators on this site!
commented 2016-06-01 13:40:54 -0400
Removed for violating rule:Avoid excessive profanity.
commented 2016-06-01 12:41:58 -0400
“David White commented 5 mins ago
MR. KOKES: Cat got your tongue?? Or is DJ OATS boot stuck in your throat??”

As usual you spoke too soon and without thinking. So predictable..lmfao
commented 2016-06-01 12:40:55 -0400
“Dj Oats commented 2 hours ago
“Look how Oats hightailed it when challenged with his opinion which I proved was factually wrong.”
Ya, your pea brain really is intimidating YAWN

Oh I think you’re going to be lacking sleep tonight again Oats just like you did last night waiting for me to response. Again, Neanderthals are predictable creatures who can only forage their concocted ideas from other Neanderthals.

“David “Duke” White commented 2 hours ago"
“Edward Moore commented 1 hour ago”

I see thing 1 and thing 2 spewed some garbage but I couldn’t be bothered reading what they said without seeing some links in support. So discounted their mindless thoughts and concluded it was not even worthy of a response to either of these two Neanderthals conjoined sisters! And you can imagine where their joining is…lol
commented 2016-06-01 12:36:01 -0400
MR. KOKES: Cat got your tongue?? Or is DJ OATS boot stuck in your throat?? In your holier than thou snippet directed at EDWARD MOORE, you again mentioned institutions of higher learning. I’m still awaiting your reply, What was that institution you attended again??

DJBT et al
commented 2016-06-01 12:33:30 -0400
“Dj Oats commented 1 hour ago
" Here is proof from NASA that the above is wrong which makes you a tard, a Neanderthal tard that is. From the NOAA"
No-one is arguing that it hasn’t been the 16 warmest years on record. If 1998 is the warmest year on record and there hasn’t been any warming or cooling in that period on a moving average, that makes the following years the warmest years on record. Fuck, your dumb as a post.”

No one is arguing…really???, you put your all into suggesting other wise and then when push comes to shove you do the Neanderthal back pedal. A moving average…what a joke you are to suggest that. lol You then to qualify your failed attempt to deflect by stating “If 1998 is the warmest year on record”. Well, it wasn’t dumbass. It was 6th warmest according to the table and the top five hottest years were after that and still in play with 2014 and 2015 being the hottest in recorded history. Why don’t you review the link again fool: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201513

Dj Oats commented 1 hour ago
The paper I presented posits the “pause” or the hiatus that proves there’s been NO WARMING while there has been a concomitant increase in CO2 emissions. That means a decoupling of the cause-effect trend asshats like you like to suck on. Correlation doesn’t mean causation, but NO correlation definitely means no causation. Anything else fails Occam’s Razor.

Your paper has no relevance to this discussion. Your paper has no scientific merit, your paper was not been vetted by a peer review nor what it every published in a renowned journal. It was merely posted on a bloggy fossil fuel sponsored site. In other words Neaderthal asshat, your paper has no credit ability what so ever in the scientific community. Nothing but garage..zelch!

Dj Oats commented 1 hour ago
“Oh and the 97% consensus thing was not the “IPCC scientists” — it’s from a study by Cook et al. (2013) in Environmental Research Letters, the same fraudster and dendrologist who runs some of the Skeptical Science links you are wont to cite and was in the middle of the Climategate shitstorm, where he states “We know fuck all!”
Since Cook et al.’s (2013) publication 2 publications have been submitted showing the faulty and obfuscated methodology and statistical rigging (e.g. poor sampling and sampling bias—he took into account pyschology studies, marketing studies, and studies that took surveys on public sentiment whilst ignoring papers contesting the AGW theory).
”http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11191-013-9647-9">http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11191-013-9647-9
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514002821

There you go trying to twist the facts again. Just another failed attempt by a fool. So in the first link you post an Abstract for a book that is being sold. Have you not looked at the many scientific reports have posted. Dozens and dozens and all free. Why, because true scientists do not make money from their research papers. Only those like David Legates and associated who wrote the flimsy paper of nothing do.

And with respect to this author of yours, David is a signatory of the Oregon Petition, which states that “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.
Prior to this, Legates was designated as Delaware’s State Climatologist. He was then asked to step down as State Climatologist by the Dean of the University. Ouch! There goes his credibility lmfao

In response to his continued use of the title “State Climatologist,” Delaware Governor Ruth Ann Minner wrote to Legates: “Your views on climate change, as I understand them, are not aligned with those of my administration. In light of my position and due to the confusion surrounding your role with the state, I am directing you to offer any future statements on this or other public policy matters only on behalf of yourself and not as state climatologist.” Double ouch!!! Again LMFAO

But what is really telling in his motivation are his affiliations and where he gets his funding:
Affiliations:
George C. Marshall Institute — “Expert.”
Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) — Listed as “personnel” since 2012.
National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) — “Adjunct Scholar” and “Environmental Expert.”,
Independent Institute — “Research Fellow.”
Heartland Institute — “Expert.” <<< where have we seen this one before..lol
Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP) —Past “Allied Expert.”
Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI)— “Adjunct Scholar*” and contributor.
*ExxonSecrets and other sources have listed Legates as an “Adjunct Scholar” with the CEI, but this information has been since removed from the CEI website. Legates is listed among CEI’s “alumni,” and CEI currently maintains a blank contributor page for a “David Legates.”

Funding
The George C. Marshall Institute has received over $700,000 in funding from oil-giant ExxonMobil.
The NCPA has received over $465,900 from oil giant ExxonMobil.
The NCPA also has a history with tobacco company Philip Morris. For example, in a 1998 Philip Morris document titled “third-party public policy activity,” the NCPA is listed as an anti-government regulations group that “will write op-eds.”
The Independent Institute has received $85,000 in grants from ExxonMobil as well as grants from Philip Morris. The David H. Koch Charitable Foundation, a charitable branch of the oil-services giant Koch Industries, also contributed $160,000 between 1995 and 2001.
The Heartland Institute has received over $791,000 from oil-giant ExxonMobil since 1998.
CEI has received $2,005,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998. They have also received signification funds from the American Petroleum Institute as well as from the oil-service giant Koch Industry’s family foundations.

All these records are supports by public documentation. So what do you expect his little worthless research paper would say moron? Too bad it carries no scientific credibility whatsoever.

Your other link is no better. Once again papers for money lacking any scientific merit. As for John Cook, here is an excellent article on how science deniers like Anthony Watts try to bring in Cook into their own discussion:
https://www.realskeptic.com/2015/07/25/science-deniers-again-try-to-discredit-john-cook-and-skeptical-science/

“Watts has no idea what the context of the comments were, how they were used, or what was being researched. I can tell you that it’s going to be really embarrassing for Watts when the paper comes out, as what Watts is speculating here is not even close to what happened (which is rather obvious with the explanation Cook provided). Though it’s par the course for Watts.”

And on the contrary, Cook is an accomplished Climate Scientist who has written a number of peer reviewed and published papers: https://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=ZEN_Z2UAAAAJ&hl=en

From his papers, there is no denying his stance on global warming in that it is caused by man. So again, another failed attempt by you to twist the facts.

Dj Oats commented 1 hour ago
By the way the Russians have not embraced AGW at all…they believe insolation is primary driver of climate change, not CO2. That’s why Putin is not on board with the UN on this one, unless you believe that show he put on in Paris…like he cares if the west wastes their money on this stuff—he’d rather just avoid an oil embargo because of eco-tards in a trend of low oil prices.
http://sputniknews.com/voiceofrussia/2013_04_22/Cooling-in-the-Arctic-what-to-expect/

And now you resort to Russian state controlled media as your evidence – the Voice of Russia. Too funny..lol yet pathetic at the same time. You ever think for one moment that they are motivated like their fossil fuel counterparts in the west to distort the facts as their economy relies heavier on oil. Of course you didn’t consider that. Most Neanderthals like you don’t. Besides, there is not one reference cited in the above article to support such an outrageous claim. It is just a bunch of bullshit spewed unto those like you who want to believe. Again, this is not what over 97% of the creditable and accomplished scientists are saying. https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-study-shows-global-sea-ice-diminishing-despite-antarctic-gains

https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-evidence-causes/question-12/
And I know where you are going to try to go with this now as you Neanderthals are so predictable – the Antarctica. My suggestion, save yourself further embarrassment by just heading back to your cave.

In fact, I will give you one more attempt to try and discredit what I have put forth. Up to this point it’s like playing with a Neanderthal child with nothing of any substantive merit or value to show. Best you just go and cower in your cave to save yourself any further humiliation. You’ve been warned tard.
commented 2016-06-01 11:18:20 -0400
Mr Kokes…..for the record, your assessment of me couldn’t be further off the mark,whereas, as everyone here knows, mine was bang on about you. I only left out one thing; you’ve gotten really boring!
commented 2016-06-01 10:27:21 -0400
MR. KOKES: I see mommy turned your computer back on. In your latest response to me, you stated " Hence why they LIKELY created an investigative body…….Figured something so obvious in reason would have been common sense to most.

I see that you inserted the word “likely”, meaning you obviously don’t know. If you don’t “know” how could it be obvious in reason and be common sense to most. You talk about potential abuse of monies by less desirables holding out their hand with no intention of doing the right thing with the money they receive. The real problem is that the “less desirable” is the UN itself, and now our illustrious PM has showered them with billions of $$$, most of which will be gobbled up in bureaucratic graft and corruption. Might as well have burnt it and added it to you’re global warming problem. But a fraction of said monies will ever get to where it might do some good.

Kokes, you seem to have skirted many questions in my posts, displaying your selective answering ability. So here goes again.

What institute(s) of higher learning was that again? Did you major in climatology?
Millenial or????
Childhood issues?
Small in stature
Seems like a bit of a “Napoleon Complex”

I read your responses to the others. Seems that your main interest is confrontation. Once engaged a 10 page diatribe ensues, with a plethora of questionable and bias links for reference, a game anyone can play.

I wish you could could have a live head on with Elton Braun. I’d put my money on the adult, and WE all know who that would be!!!!

Awaiting your pomposity.

DJBT,STPC,WTS and NN
commented 2016-06-01 10:22:25 -0400
“Look how Oats hightailed it when challenged with his opinion which I proved was factually wrong.”

Ya, your pea brain really is intimidating YAWN
commented 2016-06-01 10:19:43 -0400
" Here is proof from NASA that the above is wrong which makes you a tard, a Neanderthal tard that is. From the NOAA"

You really are an idiot. Nice try at the bait and switch, but I actually think you’re just an ignoramus. No-one is arguing that it hasn’t been the 16 warmest years on record. If 1998 is the warmest year on record and there hasn’t been any warming or cooling in that period on a moving average, that makes the following years the warmest years on record. Fuck, your dumb as a post.

The paper I presented posits the “pause” or the hiatus that proves there’s been NO WARMING while there has been a concomitant increase in CO2 emissions. That means a decoupling of the cause-effect trend asshats like you like to suck on. Correlation doesn’t mean causation, but NO correlation definitely means no causation. Anything else fails Occam’s Razor.

Oh and the 97% consensus thing was not the “IPCC scientists” — it’s from a study by Cook et al. (2013) in Environmental Research Letters, the same fraudster and dendrologist who runs some of the Skeptical Science links you are wont to cite and was in the middle of the Climategate shitstorm, where he states “We know fuck all!”

Since Cook et al.’s (2013) publication 2 publications have been submitted showing the faulty and obfuscated methodology and statistical rigging (e.g. poor sampling and sampling bias—he took into account pyschology studies, marketing studies, and studies that took surveys on public sentiment whilst ignoring papers contesting the AGW theory).

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11191-013-9647-9
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514002821

By the way the Russians have not embraced AGW at all…they believe insolation is primary driver of climate change, not CO2. That’s why Putin is not on board with the UN on this one, unless you believe that show he put on in Paris…like he cares if the west wastes their money on this stuff—he’d rather just avoid an oil embargo because of eco-tards in a trend of low oil prices.

http://sputniknews.com/voiceofrussia/2013_04_22/Cooling-in-the-Arctic-what-to-expect/
commented 2016-06-01 08:58:02 -0400
Mr Kokes insulted: “Sure you were, and what did you do on the ship, scrub the deck? Like they would tell you anything about what they were studying and if they did, it was doubtful you would understand. In most cases, weather ships are tasked to do just that, gather data. Many weather ships around the world do this. The data is then collated at a scientific lab and then analyzed. Results are provided to the UN. And of course, the UN is leading the charge on global warming. So thanks for that unless bit of information.”

More denigration from the narrow minded!
commented 2016-06-01 08:54:41 -0400
“Drew Wakariuk commented 7 hours ago
Kokes there never was 97% of scientists, that was pure BS , how can they have a study institute? You are a fool.”

I’m going to humour you one last time. Why, because you are so easy you big foolish Neanderthal.
When they say 97% of climate scientists agree that anthropogenic (HUMAN INDUCED) climate change is real, that’s not just liberal scientists. That is the INTERNATIONAL panel on climate change. That means scientists in countries like China and Russia are included, not just socialist European countries and liberal Democracies. Scientists and all over the world agree.

Now, why don’t you put down that comic book and close the link to Ball’s Heartthrob Institution of the Neanderthals and fraudulent Enemies of Pretend Science and do some reading from creditable sources:
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm
https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=human+activity+has+resulted+in+increased+levels+of+CO2
https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=97%25+of+scientists+who+believe+in+global+warming&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5
https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=intergovernmental+panel+on+climate+change+%28ipcc%29&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwi1s4qXrLbLAhUU-WMKHa1rDowQgQMIGTAA

Again, so easy to make a fool out of you Drool.
commented 2016-06-01 08:46:29 -0400
“Drew Wakariuk commented 7 hours ago
Kokes links can be provided for all viewpoints, what makes yours valid?”

Obviously you missed the post I made qualifying the links:
“Mr. Kokes commented 14 hours ago
Here is a PARTIAL list of creditable sites with creditable scientific research papers that have been peer reviewed and published in scientific journals. The links contain well established government sites, non-profit organizations, professional association, and universities.”

And obviously, you speak without thinking, reading or learning. I could go out but why bother, as you just did that yourself being your own worse enemy.
commented 2016-06-01 08:36:13 -0400
“Edward Moore commented 10 hours ago
Mr. Kokes……so I gather you got your degree from the Internet. That’s not an education. It just shows that you are easily indoctrinated…like a child. And you’re also a pompous ass. That’s my learned observation, not science.”

Oh that hurt. Please be more gentle with me next time. Now I would have a concern IF I actually cared what you had to say. Your “learned observation”…OMG. Well, my “learned observation” is that you didn’t even complete Neanderthal high school and spent the rest of your life relying on your subjective observations. And that is why there are institutions of higher learning because “learned observation” is simply not enough to acquire a heightened awareness of the world around you. Your world is your trailer park. Need I say more.
commented 2016-06-01 08:29:57 -0400
“Jay Kelly commented 9 hours ago
Mr. Kokes, I do not particularly like your use of the term “you people” to describe commenters on here.
We may not, on average, have much education, but we are entitled to our opinions —even opinions that seem ill-informed.
Keep your generalizations to yourself.”

With all due respect Jay, with present company excluded, I am up to my armpits in managing a host of ill-conceived ideas from every other Neanderthal here. So give me some credit in being somewhat tactful. And I welcome opinions however opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. All I ask is if you have an opinion support that opinion with some fact by posting a link to that fact. This is critical if we indeed to have an transparent and meaningful discussion.

Look how Oats hightailed it when challenged with his opinion which I proved was factually wrong.
commented 2016-06-01 08:24:27 -0400
“David White commented 12 hours ago
MR. KOKES: Why has your beloved UN created a body to investigate anyone using man made global warming as a tool to raise money. Anyone doing such is subject to some form of punishment, be it financial or otherwise. Why would this be necessary?If your sermons are so correct, Why? "

Well Davide “Duke”, like with everything there is abuse and with the money the UN is waving, you are going to get the less desirables holding out their hand with no intention of doing the right thing with the money they receive. Hence why they likely created an investigative body and reduced overall funding for adaptive management approaches. Figured something so obvious in reason would have been common sense to most.
commented 2016-06-01 08:20:08 -0400
“Elton Braun commented 12 hours ago
Mr.kokes-your comment, “the UN is leading the charge against global warming” says all I need to hear. What could possibly go wrong? Or should I ask is this why everything is going wrong?”

Firstly all knowing in his own mind Oats brought up the UN. And secondly, if you had read my posts I am not too happy with a huge bureaucracy like the UN giving money to other large bureaucracies (governments). Point is, they are doing their best to follow scientific advise and with constant resistance, including from those in the Neanderthal community, it is not an easy task.
commented 2016-06-01 08:16:08 -0400
“Pat McCaughey commented 13 hours ago
You know I’m sure that people said there was something wrong in the head of people that said the earth was round, so is the are still flat?”

You seem fixated on whether the earth is round or flat. Obviously something you are still determining in your Neanderthal mind.
commented 2016-06-01 02:17:14 -0400
I did not know that all South Africans were Black.
I guess it is just the Fire Fighters.
commented 2016-06-01 02:01:34 -0400
I wonder if Kokes believs the scientists who claimed MJ damages chromosomes? They came to this conclusion by putting out a lit joint in a petri dish containing chromosomes , but hey they were scientists at a university LMAO!
commented 2016-06-01 01:59:47 -0400
Kokes links can be provided for all viewpoints, what makes yours valid? The internet fact checker LMAO!
Now tell me why all these same people made shoddy false predictions in the past? When was that ice age anyways?
commented 2016-06-01 01:58:17 -0400
Kokes there never was 97% of scientists, that was pure BS , how can they have a study institute? You are a fool.
commented 2016-06-01 01:56:24 -0400
Hey Ron C did you make any nickels on Bellamy Hill today? You are an idiot.
commented 2016-06-01 01:53:42 -0400
Andrew burning wood has more carbon than burning gas, and missing trees means no co2 getting taken in , just like the green idiots pine beetle disaster. You are not very smart.
commented 2016-05-31 23:39:43 -0400
Mr. Kokes, I do not particularly like your use of the term “you people” to describe commenters on here.

We may not, on average, have much education, but we are entitled to our opinions —even opinions that seem ill-informed.

Keep your generalizations to yourself.
commented 2016-05-31 23:29:40 -0400
Mark Chadwick commented
“And children that is why you don’t vote for a PM from Quebec.The worst PMS ever. "

With the typo – The worst PMS ever. – Priceless, very funny!! PMS, Premenstrual syndrome. Rather fitting too, he is a pain.
Without the typo – The worst PMs ever. – Very true but not funny.
commented 2016-05-31 22:11:30 -0400
Mr. Kokes……so I gather you got your degree from the Internet. That’s not an education. It just shows that you are easily indoctrinated…like a child. And you’re also a pompous ass. That’s my learned observation, not science.