Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I wonder what the legal sentencing will be for these criminals? The tax cost globally to the human community from their fraudulent back door global socialist scheme certainly has to be measured in the hundreds of trillions of dollars. This would make their crime the single biggest premeditated crime against all of humanity in the entire history of recorded human existence.
What would you expect for sentencing for this crime these people did to us???
Sheer ignorance.NOT ONE national or international scientific body disputes global warming or that it's man made.
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yet CONZ come on here and point to these emails as PROOF that there is a vast global conspiracy involving ALL CLIMATE SCIENTISTS and POLITICIANS WORLDWIDE to be in on it.
Tell you what CONZ....come up with some SCIENCE that proves EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIFIC BODY wrong AND provide proof of the global conspiracy which you say is occurring.
THEN and ONLY then will you be taken seriously by anyone with half a brain.
Hey, dumbfuck, Tyndall's experiment doesn't prove what you were programmed to believe it proves.When the earth has an atmosphere that resembles the planet Venus..will you guys be happy?
Only if I own beach front.
In the mean time work on that one experiment that puts all doubt to rest.
Hey dumb fuck, it was done in 1858 by John Tyndall of England, and published in 1861. It has been done and refined many times since. Just because you are totally ignorant, and proud of it, does not mean the rest of us are.
NOT ONE national or international scientific body disputes global warming or that it's man made.
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yet CONZ come on here and point to these emails as PROOF that there is a vast global conspiracy involving ALL CLIMATE SCIENTISTS and POLITICIANS WORLDWIDE to be in on it.
Tell you what CONZ....come up with some SCIENCE that proves EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIFIC BODY wrong AND provide proof of the global conspiracy which you say is occurring.
THEN and ONLY then will you be taken seriously by anyone with half a brain.
Actually it's the other way around. We have shown many times that all that is being observed and has been observed is normal variability and has occured countless times in the history of the planet. We have also shown that there is NO empirical data to support the theory of AGW. None. All there is are computer models of proven poor performance.
It is YOU who need to prove that what is occuring now is somehow different then what has happened in the past. Occams Razor my friend, Occams Razor. Look it up.
If you do not know what the 'normal range' is, how can you prove it one way or the other?
That is why so many studies, using ice core samples and other methods, have been done, and so many are currently being conducted.
As I said, cause is not known for a fact yet, but the earth is warming at an alarming rate.
So, in answer to the OP....
If Global Warming is man-made, then what will be the penalty paid by Global Warming deniers when we all suffer for their actions?
If you had science on your side, you wouldn't need emotionalism and fear-mongering.When the earth has an atmosphere that resembles the planet Venus..will you guys be happy?
Hey, dumbfuck, Tyndall's experiment doesn't prove what you were programmed to believe it proves.Only if I own beach front.
In the mean time work on that one experiment that puts all doubt to rest.
Hey dumb fuck, it was done in 1858 by John Tyndall of England, and published in 1861. It has been done and refined many times since. Just because you are totally ignorant, and proud of it, does not mean the rest of us are.
Are you saying "We're all gonna DIE!!! if we don't wreck the economies of the Western world right now!!" ISN'T fear-mongering?If you had science on your side, you wouldn't need emotionalism and fear-mongering.When the earth has an atmosphere that resembles the planet Venus..will you guys be happy?
Yes, because massive conspiracy theories...
claiming the entire world's scientific community is in cahoots with the UN and most world governments...
on a giant world-wide scam to defraud everyone on the planet...
isn't "emotionalism" and "fear-mongering" at all.
Right?
Perhaps the OP could tell us the names of ANY scientific body, national or international that denies global climate change or that it's man made?
It's a TRICK QUESTION! Because NO SCIENTIFIC BODY, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD denies climate change. Not ONE.
This is like Creationists and Evolution. They deny evolution took place, yet don't have anywhere NEAR the level of empirical evidence to support their claims.
Ask a creationist HOW fossils got there and you get some variance on the theme of "it's magic!"
Same thing if you ask a climate change denier where HIS empirical data is.
Instead of posting links to various conspiracy theories, perhaps the OP could point us to the EMPIRICAL SCIENTIFIC DATA which disputes the measurements that the climate is changing.
Oh, wait, he can't because it doesn't exist.
Insistence that global warming isn't occurring is based in nothing other than ignorance and wishful thinking and a fear of change.
Geologists study the history of the earth and realize climate has changed often in the past due to natural causes. The earth’s climate naturally varies continually, in both directions, at varying rates, and on many scales. In recent decades global temperatures have risen. However, our planet has been far warmer and cooler today than many times in the geologic past, even within the past 10,000 years.
Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through National Academy of Sciences, American Geophysical Union, American Academy for the Advancement of Science, and American Meteorological Society. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum-case scenarios forecast in some models.
If you had science on your side, you wouldn't need emotionalism and fear-mongering.When the earth has an atmosphere that resembles the planet Venus..will you guys be happy?
I read it. You didn't.Hey, dumbfuck, Tyndall's experiment doesn't prove what you were programmed to believe it proves.Hey dumb fuck, it was done in 1858 by John Tyndall of England, and published in 1861. It has been done and refined many times since. Just because you are totally ignorant, and proud of it, does not mean the rest of us are.
Daveyboy, just because you are too stupid to read what the old scientific paper stated does not mean the rest of us are.
Ahh, yes, you linked a study that said "computer models suggest..."And the experiment has been repeated many times since, and refined with modern instruments. The absorption spectra of the GHGs is irrefutable evidence that we are changing the energy balance of the Earth's atmosphere.
Maybe this is simple enough for you to understand, Daveyboy, seeing as I already, on another thread posted the Harvard explanation of the working of GHGs.
Greenhouse Gases
Actually it's the other way around. We have shown many times that all that is being observed and has been observed is normal variability and has occured countless times in the history of the planet. We have also shown that there is NO empirical data to support the theory of AGW. None. All there is are computer models of proven poor performance.
It is YOU who need to prove that what is occuring now is somehow different then what has happened in the past. Occams Razor my friend, Occams Razor. Look it up.
Um, actually, you have not.
You have shown that there is variability in the planet's temperatures, yes.
But no-one has shown that the temperature changes we are seeing now are in the "normal" range.
There has in fact been evidence to the contrary, but again, the cause of Climate Change has not been proven to be man-made.
But, the cause of our current climate change has certainly NOT been proven to caused by something other than man either.
So, your assertion is incorrect.
If you do not know what the 'normal range' is, how can you prove it one way or the other?
Perhaps the OP could tell us the names of ANY scientific body, national or international that denies global climate change or that it's man made?
It's a TRICK QUESTION! Because NO SCIENTIFIC BODY, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD denies climate change. Not ONE.
This is like Creationists and Evolution. They deny evolution took place, yet don't have anywhere NEAR the level of empirical evidence to support their claims.
Ask a creationist HOW fossils got there and you get some variance on the theme of "it's magic!"
Corrupt Science : Evidence of Massive Climatology Fraud Exposed | ARCHITECT AFRICA | ARCHITECTURE
Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate - Forbes
The Flathead Society - Page 1 - Cal Thomas - Townhall Conservative
Climatologists Trade Tips on Destroying Evidence, Evangelizing Warming
The link below exposes the back door global socialism motive of the 'professional' environmentalists...
Global Warming Equals Socialism
I wonder what the legal sentencing will be for these criminals? The tax cost globally to the human community from their fraudulent back door global socialist scheme certainly has to be measured in the hundreds of trillions of dollars. This would make their crime the single biggest premeditated crime against all of humanity in the entire history of recorded human existence.
What would you expect for sentencing for this crime these people did to us???
I read it. You didn't.Hey, dumbfuck, Tyndall's experiment doesn't prove what you were programmed to believe it proves.
Daveyboy, just because you are too stupid to read what the old scientific paper stated does not mean the rest of us are.
Ahh, yes, you linked a study that said "computer models suggest..."And the experiment has been repeated many times since, and refined with modern instruments. The absorption spectra of the GHGs is irrefutable evidence that we are changing the energy balance of the Earth's atmosphere.
Maybe this is simple enough for you to understand, Daveyboy, seeing as I already, on another thread posted the Harvard explanation of the working of GHGs.
Greenhouse Gases
The same computer models, I might add, that temperature data was altered to fit, instead of the other way around, as real science is done.
Don't forget that temperature increases always precede CO2 increases by several centuries.Um, actually, you have not.
You have shown that there is variability in the planet's temperatures, yes.
But no-one has shown that the temperature changes we are seeing now are in the "normal" range.
There has in fact been evidence to the contrary, but again, the cause of Climate Change has not been proven to be man-made.
But, the cause of our current climate change has certainly NOT been proven to caused by something other than man either.
So, your assertion is incorrect.
If you do not know what the 'normal range' is, how can you prove it one way or the other?
Well, we have this record that goes back at least 650,000 years in the ice cores from Antarctica. And we see no increase in GHGs at any time to match that we are seeing today. And the changes that we see in that record that involved rapid change, also involved catastrophic changes in the environment, such as the Younger Dryas period.
Yes, we do have a record of what is normal range variability in both temperature and time, and we are far outside of it.
I repeat: If you had science on your side, you wouldn't need emotionalism and fear-mongering.But go ahead, accept the rants of an obese junkie over all the research of the scientists involved in the study of climate. It is only your children and grandchildren that will pay for your willfull ignorance.
Are you saying "We're all gonna DIE!!! if we don't wreck the economies of the Western world right now!!" ISN'T fear-mongering?
When every proposed "solution" to AGW is political and economic, it's not based on science.
I don't have to lie, Roxy.I read it. You didn't.Daveyboy, just because you are too stupid to read what the old scientific paper stated does not mean the rest of us are.
Ahh, yes, you linked a study that said "computer models suggest..."And the experiment has been repeated many times since, and refined with modern instruments. The absorption spectra of the GHGs is irrefutable evidence that we are changing the energy balance of the Earth's atmosphere.
Maybe this is simple enough for you to understand, Daveyboy, seeing as I already, on another thread posted the Harvard explanation of the working of GHGs.
Greenhouse Gases
The same computer models, I might add, that temperature data was altered to fit, instead of the other way around, as real science is done.
What a liar you are, Daveyboy.
Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse Gas Molecules:
The greenhouse gas molecules are shown in the next series of figures along with the IR spectra and the bending and vibrations caused by absorbing the IR radiation. The arrows on the molecules indicate the direction of the bends and vibrations of the bonds. The IR spectra indicates the specific energies at certain wavelengths which are absorbed. Radiation that is 100% transmittance is not blocked but travels straight through the sample. The dips in the lines are caused by the absorption of energy, hence only 10% of the energy is transmitted.
The graphic on the left is carbon dioxide.
Figure 1: Water
Figure 2: Methane
Figure 3: Nitrous Oxide
Figure 4: All Greenhouse Gases
Not computer models, but the results of experiments by Physicists. The same Physicists that have posted this;
The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
Is your side relying on fear-mongering, or isn't it?Are you saying "We're all gonna DIE!!! if we don't wreck the economies of the Western world right now!!" ISN'T fear-mongering?
When every proposed "solution" to AGW is political and economic, it's not based on science.
Did you see me say that?
I think not.
'Execute' Skeptics! Shock Call To Action: 'At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers' -- 'Shouldn't we start punishing them now?'I said that the "man-made" scenario is likely, given the data, but hasn't been proved.
The OP was the one that started it by suggesting prison sentences for people who are just honestly trying to stop what they feel may be leading to disaster. And he (or she) is on your side.
Are you saying "We're all gonna DIE!!! if we don't wreck the economies of the Western world right now!!" ISN'T fear-mongering?
When every proposed "solution" to AGW is political and economic, it's not based on science.
Did you see me say that?
I think not.
I said that the "man-made" scenario is likely, given the data, but hasn't been proved.
The OP was the one that started it by suggesting prison sentences for people who are just honestly trying to stop what they feel may be leading to disaster. And he (or she) is on your side.
