A Real Physicist Responds to the Climate Change Scam

[Wyld Kard]

It doesn't seem to "make any sense" to you, JustCrazy, but that is only because you are a very ignorant, very retarded troll whose total knowledge of science could be written on a single piece of toilet paper in large letters.

...the data you post is garbage.....the data is corrupted......that inaccurate data....the data is inaccurate and manipulated and adjusted and guestimated....

LOLOLOLOLOL......as JustCrazy clings desperately to his denier cult crackpot conspiracy theories and deranged myths....he becomes more and more insane and irrelevant....

And YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of global warming / climate change, hoping to convince others of your brainwashed beliefs. You're really pathetic, RollingBlunder.

Nope! Wrong again, as always, Wildasscrank. I stick with the scientific facts about anthropogenic global warming / climate change, as found in the testimony and data of the world community of climate scientists. YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers, sponsored by the fossil fuel industry and their billionaire investors, like the Koch brothers. YOU are the pathetic brainwashed fool, Wildasscrank, as you make clear in every dimwitted, deranged post you make.

I stick with the scientific facts

Yeah, sure YOU do.

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers,

Just keep drinking that Kool-Aid and believing the lies to be true. It's what idiots like yourself do best.

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Yawn............You're ignorance is boring me and your so-called insults is weak.
You really have absolutely NOTHING to back-up the bullshit that YOU claim other then "some opinion".

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard

So says the dumbfuck who was gullible enough to buy into the lies.

Your posts are choked full of bullshit, but that's to expected from a gullible dumbfuck like yourself.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It doesn't seem to "make any sense" to you, JustCrazy, but that is only because you are a very ignorant, very retarded troll whose total knowledge of science could be written on a single piece of toilet paper in large letters.

...the data you post is garbage.....the data is corrupted......that inaccurate data....the data is inaccurate and manipulated and adjusted and guestimated....

LOLOLOLOLOL......as JustCrazy clings desperately to his denier cult crackpot conspiracy theories and deranged myths....he becomes more and more insane and irrelevant....

And YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of global warming / climate change, hoping to convince others of your brainwashed beliefs. You're really pathetic, RollingBlunder.

Nope! Wrong again, as always, Wildasscrank. I stick with the scientific facts about anthropogenic global warming / climate change, as found in the testimony and data of the world community of climate scientists. YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers, sponsored by the fossil fuel industry and their billionaire investors, like the Koch brothers. YOU are the pathetic brainwashed fool, Wildasscrank, as you make clear in every dimwitted, deranged post you make.

I stick with the scientific facts

Yeah, sure YOU do.

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers,

Just keep drinking that Kool-Aid and believing the lies to be true. It's what idiots like yourself do best.

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Wait, your link proving "scientific facts" is titled.......

Scientific opinion on climate change

 

[RollingThunder]

LOLOLOLOLOL......as JustCrazy clings desperately to his denier cult crackpot conspiracy theories and deranged myths....he becomes more and more insane and irrelevant....

And YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of global warming / climate change, hoping to convince others of your brainwashed beliefs. You're really pathetic, RollingBlunder.

Nope! Wrong again, as always, Wildasscrank. I stick with the scientific facts about anthropogenic global warming / climate change, as found in the testimony and data of the world community of climate scientists. YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers, sponsored by the fossil fuel industry and their billionaire investors, like the Koch brothers. YOU are the pathetic brainwashed fool, Wildasscrank, as you make clear in every dimwitted, deranged post you make.

I stick with the scientific facts

Yeah, sure YOU do.

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers,

Just keep drinking that Kool-Aid and believing the lies to be true. It's what idiots like yourself do best.

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Wait, your link proving "scientific facts" is titled.......

Scientific opinion on climate change

Only a total retard could possibly get confused about that point or consider it germane. Too bad you're sooooo stupid, Toadtheparrot.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of global warming / climate change, hoping to convince others of your brainwashed beliefs. You're really pathetic, RollingBlunder.

Nope! Wrong again, as always, Wildasscrank. I stick with the scientific facts about anthropogenic global warming / climate change, as found in the testimony and data of the world community of climate scientists. YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers, sponsored by the fossil fuel industry and their billionaire investors, like the Koch brothers. YOU are the pathetic brainwashed fool, Wildasscrank, as you make clear in every dimwitted, deranged post you make.

I stick with the scientific facts

Yeah, sure YOU do.

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers,

Just keep drinking that Kool-Aid and believing the lies to be true. It's what idiots like yourself do best.

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Wait, your link proving "scientific facts" is titled.......

Scientific opinion on climate change

Only a total retard could possibly get confused about that point or consider it germane. Too bad you're sooooo stupid, Toadtheparrot.

Only a total retard

But enough about you.

 

[RollingThunder]

Nope! Wrong again, as always, Wildasscrank. I stick with the scientific facts about anthropogenic global warming / climate change, as found in the testimony and data of the world community of climate scientists. YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers, sponsored by the fossil fuel industry and their billionaire investors, like the Koch brothers. YOU are the pathetic brainwashed fool, Wildasscrank, as you make clear in every dimwitted, deranged post you make.

I stick with the scientific facts

Yeah, sure YOU do.

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

YOU cling to the lies and misinformation of your little cult of AGW reality deniers,

Just keep drinking that Kool-Aid and believing the lies to be true. It's what idiots like yourself do best.

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Wait, your link proving "scientific facts" is titled.......

Scientific opinion on climate change

Only a total retard could possibly get confused about that point or consider it germane. Too bad you're sooooo stupid, Toadtheparrot.

Only a total retard

Yup, that's you. Only a total retard could post the insanely moronic drivel that you post.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, sure YOU do.

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

Just keep drinking that Kool-Aid and believing the lies to be true. It's what idiots like yourself do best.

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Wait, your link proving "scientific facts" is titled.......

Scientific opinion on climate change

Only a total retard could possibly get confused about that point or consider it germane. Too bad you're sooooo stupid, Toadtheparrot.

Only a total retard

Yup, that's you. Only a total retard could post the insanely moronic drivel that you post.

Post some more "facts" that are opinions. Hilarious!

 

[RollingThunder]

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Wait, your link proving "scientific facts" is titled.......

Scientific opinion on climate change

Only a total retard could possibly get confused about that point or consider it germane. Too bad you're sooooo stupid, Toadtheparrot.

Only a total retard

Yup, that's you. Only a total retard could post the insanely moronic drivel that you post.

Post some more "facts" that are opinions. Hilarious!

is English your second language, Toadtheparrot? It seems very unlikely that you could even have a second language seeing how extremely retarded you are. So, that means you're just too stupid to understand the meaning of the words. Too bad. Try actually reading the material in that link and then tell us that the position statements of all of the world's leading science professional organizations, societies, and academies are all just "opinions" in the half-assed way that you understand that word.

 

[SSDD]

The Tertiary began 65 million years ago, not 40 million. And the usual date given by all the texts I have read is usually 2 million years ago, sometimes 3 million. That is when the continental glaciation of North America and Europe began. Point is, the CO2 level was less than 500 ppm at that point.

Still waiting rocks...when was the last time there was no permanent ice pack at either of the poles?...answer:...that would be about 40 million years. And when was sea level last high enough to support your claim that there was no ice pack at either pole?

As you can see from the graphic below, se level started falling with the formation of a permanent antarctic ice sheet around 40 million years ago....the beginning of the present ice age.

you can make all the claims you like regarding when the ice age began, but the facts support me and my claim of 40 million years...

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, SSo DDumb, if you want to continually make your own definitions in science, perhaps you had better publish them so the rest of us can keep up. Your new paradigm in electro-magnetic radiation should be quite a break through. Give us a holler when you have revolutionized both geology and physics.

 

[jc456]

I see the concept of "scientific facts" is beyond your very limited comprehension, Wildasscrank. Not surprising, given the ignorance you displayed in your previous posts. Maybe someday you'll figure what that means. Here's a clue....

Scientific opinion on climate change

It's really too bad you're such a delusional retard, Wildasscrank.

Wait, your link proving "scientific facts" is titled.......

Scientific opinion on climate change

Only a total retard could possibly get confused about that point or consider it germane. Too bad you're sooooo stupid, Toadtheparrot.

Only a total retard

Yup, that's you. Only a total retard could post the insanely moronic drivel that you post.

Post some more "facts" that are opinions. Hilarious!

is English your second language, Toadtheparrot? It seems very unlikely that you could even have a second language seeing how extremely retarded you are. So, that means you're just too stupid to understand the meaning of the words. Too bad. Try actually reading the material in that link and then tell us that the position statements of all of the world's leading science professional organizations, societies, and academies are all just "opinions" in the half-assed way that you understand that word.

hahahahahaahahahhha, wow the stupid stick really hit you dude! Holy crap, dude, really? REALLY? You can't be this stupid, just can't be. OMG!!!!! Why don't you open up a link to a dictionary and look up what the word opinion means!!!!! Holy crap, the stupid just doesn't stop here. Especially you!!!

 

[SSDD]

Well, SSo DDumb, if you want to continually make your own definitions in science, perhaps you had better publish them so the rest of us can keep up. Your new paradigm in electro-magnetic radiation should be quite a break through. Give us a holler when you have revolutionized both geology and physics.

So tell me rocks why did sea level start falling around 40 million years ago if not for the onset of an ice age? Clearly you will believe whatever you want without regard to reality..you have proven it over and over. Still waiting for you to state the last time sea level was high enough to support your claim of no permanent ice at either of the poles.

 

[RollingThunder]

The Tertiary began 65 million years ago, not 40 million. And the usual date given by all the texts I have read is usually 2 million years ago, sometimes 3 million. That is when the continental glaciation of North America and Europe began. Point is, the CO2 level was less than 500 ppm at that point.

Still waiting rocks...when was the last time there was no permanent ice pack at either of the poles?...answer:...that would be about 40 million years. And when was sea level last high enough to support your claim that there was no ice pack at either pole? As you can see from the graphic below, se level started falling with the formation of a permanent antarctic ice sheet around 40 million years ago....the beginning of the present ice age. you can make all the claims you like regarding when the ice age began, but the facts support me and my claim of 40 million years...

And once again the poor denier cult retard demonstrates the awful power of the Dunning-Kruger Effect to confuse retards into falsely believing that they are not only intellectually capable of understanding science (or anything else more complicated than opening a beer), but that they know more and understand science better than the actual scientists.

The retard 'SSoooDDuuumb' made a very bogus claim that the current Ice Age, that scientists call the Quaternary Ice Age, began 40 million years ago. He was shown reputable evidence, which he ignored, stating that the current Ice Age started 2.58 million years ago. He now persists in asserting that he is right and all of the encyclopedias and other scientific sources are wrong. He just made a claim about "the formation of a permanent antarctic ice sheet around 40 million years ago. Poor little retard! In reality, Antarctica did not exist as a separate continent 40 million years ago. Here's the facts....

Antarctica
Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia
More than 170 million years ago, Antarctica was part of the supercontinentGondwana. Over time, Gondwana gradually broke apart and Antarctica as we know it today was formed around 25 million years ago. Antarctica was not always cold, dry, and covered in ice sheets. At a number of points in its long history, it was farther north, experienced a tropical or temperate climate, was covered in forests, and inhabited by various ancient life forms.

Antarctica: Facts About the Coldest Continent
LiveScience
Millions of years ago, Antarctica had a much warmer climate and boasted evergreen forests and a variety of animals. Fossils of this earlier period provide scientists with clues about life before Antarctica became a vast icy shelf.

SSoooDDuuumb also made the idiotic claim that: "when was the last time there was no permanent ice pack at either of the poles?...answer:...that would be about 40 million years"

Ice-Free Arctic in Pliocene, Last Time CO2 Levels above 400 PPM
Sediment cores from an undisturbed Siberian lake reveal a warmer, wetter Arctic
Scientific American
July 18, 2012
Scientists trying to determine how the Earth might change as temperatures rise often look back in time to a period around 3.6 million years ago called the middle Pliocene, when concentrations of carbon dioxide ranged from about 380 to 450 parts per million. (Today they are nearing 400.) A study published yesterday in the journal Science analyzed the longest land-based sediment core ever taken in the Arctic and found that during this period, from 3.6 million to 2.2 million years ago, the area around the North Pole was much warmer and wetter than it is now. In the middle Pliocene, summer temperatures in the Arctic were around 60 degrees Fahrenheit, which is about 14 degrees warmer than they are now, the study found.

The second part of the story involves the part of the core from 2.2 million to 3.6 million years ago. In their analysis, the scientists found this part of the sediment core contains enough fossil pollen and other signs of vegetation to bolster the idea that the mid-Pliocene Arctic was warm and forested, making it highly unlikely that the region had year-round sea ice at that time, Julie Brigham-Grette, the study's lead author and a quaternary geologist at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, said. "If you have a forested Arctic with five different kinds of pine trees ... you can't really have perennial sea ice at the same time," she said.