"Billion-dollar climate denial network exposed"

[jc456]

No one is funding me

You people have been played like a cheap

perhaps, but watching the orchestra that are the warmers is inspiring to say the least. I wish you all would at least tune your instruments, your facts are all off key.

 

[Stephanie]

Funny the fools right here on-site denying it. Are you guys at least getting paid to deny things? If not, SUCKERS!

s0n...........suckers?

How about......you spend far too much time on far left fringe media outlets!! That don't carry stories like THIS >>>


Gallup Concern About Environment Down Americans Worry Least About Global Warming CNS News



Ask me how hard Im laughing right now????

He's becoming another thread troll

 

[jc456]

Funny the fools right here on-site denying it. Are you guys at least getting paid to deny things? If not, SUCKERS!

s0n...........suckers?

How about......you spend far too much time on far left fringe media outlets!! That don't carry stories like THIS >>>


Gallup Concern About Environment Down Americans Worry Least About Global Warming CNS News



Ask me how hard Im laughing right now????

He's becoming another thread troll

becoming? he graduated a while ago.

 

[SpinDr79]

Hey just out of curiosity (not trying to lose diplomacy via name calling as a crutch or ganging up to push a partisan ideal) I am looking to see if any correlation exists here on this thread between scientific advancements and political leverage. I can tell 8/10 on here are conservatives, most likely voted for Romney and will vote anti-democratic in 2016. So I must ask those of you who I just described, Do you also not "believe" in evolution?

huh?

Straightforward question

 

[jc456]

Hey just out of curiosity (not trying to lose diplomacy via name calling as a crutch or ganging up to push a partisan ideal) I am looking to see if any correlation exists here on this thread between scientific advancements and political leverage. I can tell 8/10 on here are conservatives, most likely voted for Romney and will vote anti-democratic in 2016. So I must ask those of you who I just described, Do you also not "believe" in evolution?

huh?

Straightforward question

No, it wasn't

 

[IanC]

Hey just out of curiosity (not trying to lose diplomacy via name calling as a crutch or ganging up to push a partisan ideal) I am looking to see if any correlation exists here on this thread between scientific advancements and political leverage. I can tell 8/10 on here are conservatives, most likely voted for Romney and will vote anti-democratic in 2016. So I must ask those of you who I just described, Do you also not "believe" in evolution?

I'm a classical liberal but I have become somewhat jaded by liberal policies that always seem to overstep and cause more problems than they solved.

Evolution is a tool that is undeniable but it certainly falls short in explaining how life first started.

 

[Crick]

You are all such idiots. What will be bad for us is rapid CHANGE.

That the world is warming is most certainly settled science. That humans are the primary cause is settled. That because humans are lazy and afraid to look at unpleasant truths and make long term commitments and many of them are as stupid as you all, warming is going to take the IPCC's worst case scenario and then some. Your children and their children will be cursing your names for the their entire lives.

 

[jc456]

You are all such idiots. What will be bad for us is rapid CHANGE.

That the world is warming is most certainly settled science. That humans are the primary cause is settled. That because humans are lazy and afraid to look at unpleasant truths and make long term commitments and many of them are as stupid as you all, warming is going to take the IPCC's worst case scenario and then some. Your children and their children will be cursing your names for the their entire lives.

Face palm

 

[Billy_Bob]

You are all such idiots. What will be bad for us is rapid CHANGE.

That the world is warming is most certainly settled science. That humans are the primary cause is settled. That because humans are lazy and afraid to look at unpleasant truths and make long term commitments and many of them are as stupid as you all, warming is going to take the IPCC's worst case scenario and then some. Your children and their children will be cursing your names for the their entire lives.

The only RAPID CHANGE we are about to see is cooling.. Warming? only if you use adjusted and homogenized data.. I am so tired of this AGW lie..

 

[jc456]

You are all such idiots. What will be bad for us is rapid CHANGE.

That the world is warming is most certainly settled science. That humans are the primary cause is settled. That because humans are lazy and afraid to look at unpleasant truths and make long term commitments and many of them are as stupid as you all, warming is going to take the IPCC's worst case scenario and then some. Your children and their children will be cursing your names for the their entire lives.

The only RAPID CHANGE we are about to see is cooling.. Warming? only if you use adjusted and homogenized data.. I am so tired of this AGW lie..

Funny they can't post one piece of evidence to prove their mumbo jumbo

 

[Dot Com]

No one is funding me

we know that from your constant use of hyperbole

 

[JoeMoma]

No one is funding me

we know that from your constant use of hyperbole

Hyperbole? That pretty much sums up global warming.

 

[SpinDr79]

Hey just out of curiosity (not trying to lose diplomacy via name calling as a crutch or ganging up to push a partisan ideal) I am looking to see if any correlation exists here on this thread between scientific advancements and political leverage. I can tell 8/10 on here are conservatives, most likely voted for Romney and will vote anti-democratic in 2016. So I must ask those of you who I just described, Do you also not "believe" in evolution?

I'm a classical liberal but I have become somewhat jaded by liberal policies that always seem to overstep and cause more problems than they solved.

Evolution is a tool that is undeniable but it certainly falls short in explaining how life first started.

Evolution provides us with obvious physical adaptations over time and with our mapping of the human genome we have been able to further our understanding of our ancestry. The fact that we don't know exactly how life started doesn't dwarf how we do know the organic chemistry and genetic makeup of the most rudimentary examples of life and how it has evolved to a species of self awareness. I asked about it because if I was debating climate change with people who do not "believe" that humans evolved from apes and ultimately developed from unicellular organisms then it is most definitely a waste of my time. I brought it up because many republican incumbents and candidates continue to deny evolution and climate change.... I wonder if the motive is to keep their constituents ignorant so as to hold a blanket of unadulterated control over the masses. If people really knew how much we contribute to warming via fossil fuel emissions then they would (hopefully) move away from oil dependence instantly. And dog eat dog purely capitalistic oil companies are the backbone of the Republican Party. Thus one could deduce that denial of climate change could easily be accompanied by denial of other settlements of objective reality by the "anti-science party."

 

[IanC]

Hey just out of curiosity (not trying to lose diplomacy via name calling as a crutch or ganging up to push a partisan ideal) I am looking to see if any correlation exists here on this thread between scientific advancements and political leverage. I can tell 8/10 on here are conservatives, most likely voted for Romney and will vote anti-democratic in 2016. So I must ask those of you who I just described, Do you also not "believe" in evolution?

I'm a classical liberal but I have become somewhat jaded by liberal policies that always seem to overstep and cause more problems than they solved.

Evolution is a tool that is undeniable but it certainly falls short in explaining how life first started.

Evolution provides us with obvious physical adaptations over time and with our mapping of the human genome we have been able to further our understanding of our ancestry. The fact that we don't know exactly how life started doesn't dwarf how we do know the organic chemistry and genetic makeup of the most rudimentary examples of life and how it has evolved to a species of self awareness. I asked about it because if I was debating climate change with people who do not "believe" that humans evolved from apes and ultimately developed from unicellular organisms then it is most definitely a waste of my time. I brought it up because many republican incumbents and candidates continue to deny evolution and climate change.... I wonder if the motive is to keep their constituents ignorant so as to hold a blanket of unadulterated control over the masses. If people really knew how much we contribute to warming via fossil fuel emissions then they would (hopefully) move away from oil dependence instantly. And dog eat dog purely capitalistic oil companies are the backbone of the Republican Party. Thus one could deduce that denial of climate change could easily be accompanied by denial of other settlements of objective reality by the "anti-science party."

personally, I think AGW is a scientific issue. I'll leave the politics to you.

 

[Crick]

The correlation between AGW denial and conservatism is quite strong. The correlation between AGW acceptance and liberalism is less so.

If you're looking for a correlation that works in both directions with this topic, might I suggest the level of science education as the best predictor.