Global Warming

[Chris 30]

Wow, I just found some of the largest recipients of fossils fuel money in congress are using mockery to deny global warming. 97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming. Many polititions react with such statements as well it's cold today, when that argument actually has a valid scientific reason behind it. Such as the polar ice caps melting which causes the environment to be cold.

Sen James Inhofe is the chair of the environmental committee. He is also one of the largest fossils fuel recipients. He used an absolute stating, there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful they can change climate.

He's using an absolute because he can't give a valid reason as to why certain effects are occuring. Why data shows up the way it does. Why animals are dieing when natural causes don't give a significant enough reason. I can disprove his reason. Trees produce oxygen. Pollution put chemicals in the air. So yes causes do produce an effect and yes humans can affect the environment. But this is the only argument he's got

 

[Wyatt earp]

Wow, I just found some of the largest recipients of fossils fuel money in congress are using mockery to deny global warming. 97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming. Many polititions react with such statements as well it's cold today, when that argument actually has a valid scientific reason behind it. Such as the polar ice caps melting which causes the environment to be cold.

Sen James Inhofe is the chair of the environmental committee. He is also one of the largest fossils fuel recipients. He used an absolute stating, there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful they can change climate.

He's using an absolute because he can't give a valid reason as to why certain effects are occuring. Why data shows up the way it does. Why animals are dieing when natural causes don't give a significant enough reason. I can disprove his reason. Trees produce oxygen. Pollution put chemicals in the air. So yes causes do produce an effect and yes humans can affect the environment. But this is the only argument he's got

97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming.


Kid some advise, you dont even have the right AGW talking points....


I suggest you go back study some more and correct your OP because even a novice could destroy that OP

K?



Sincerely ,

Bear513


.

 

[fncceo]

Trees produce oxygen. Pollution put chemicals in the air

Oxygen is a chemical

 

[Pete7469]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wow, I just found some of the largest recipients of fossils fuel money in congress are using mockery to deny global warming. 97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming. Many polititions react with such statements as well it's cold today, when that argument actually has a valid scientific reason behind it. Such as the polar ice caps melting which causes the environment to be cold.

Sen James Inhofe is the chair of the environmental committee. He is also one of the largest fossils fuel recipients. He used an absolute stating, there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful they can change climate.

He's using an absolute because he can't give a valid reason as to why certain effects are occuring. Why data shows up the way it does. Why animals are dieing when natural causes don't give a significant enough reason. I can disprove his reason. Trees produce oxygen. Pollution put chemicals in the air. So yes causes do produce an effect and yes humans can affect the environment. But this is the only argument he's got

97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject

It's true, if you exclude enough papers, you can come up with any stupid stat you'd like.

agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming.

Causing 1% of it? Less? Be more specific.

Pollution put chemicals in the air.

That's terrible! CO2 isn't pollution.

 

[owebo]

Wow, I just found some of the largest recipients of fossils fuel money in congress are using mockery to deny global warming. 97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming. Many polititions react with such statements as well it's cold today, when that argument actually has a valid scientific reason behind it. Such as the polar ice caps melting which causes the environment to be cold.

Sen James Inhofe is the chair of the environmental committee. He is also one of the largest fossils fuel recipients. He used an absolute stating, there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful they can change climate.

He's using an absolute because he can't give a valid reason as to why certain effects are occuring. Why data shows up the way it does. Why animals are dieing when natural causes don't give a significant enough reason. I can disprove his reason. Trees produce oxygen. Pollution put chemicals in the air. So yes causes do produce an effect and yes humans can affect the environment. But this is the only argument he's got

Wow, the end of your world on January 20th is going to be crushing for you....

 

[Kosh]

Wow, I just found some of the largest recipients of fossils fuel money in congress are using mockery to deny global warming. 97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming. Many polititions react with such statements as well it's cold today, when that argument actually has a valid scientific reason behind it. Such as the polar ice caps melting which causes the environment to be cold.

Sen James Inhofe is the chair of the environmental committee. He is also one of the largest fossils fuel recipients. He used an absolute stating, there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful they can change climate.

He's using an absolute because he can't give a valid reason as to why certain effects are occuring. Why data shows up the way it does. Why animals are dieing when natural causes don't give a significant enough reason. I can disprove his reason. Trees produce oxygen. Pollution put chemicals in the air. So yes causes do produce an effect and yes humans can affect the environment. But this is the only argument he's got

The AGW religion is solely based on models that they programmed!

 

[turzovka]

Wow, I just found some of the largest recipients of fossils fuel money in congress are using mockery to deny global warming. 97% of the research papers taking a position on the subject agree with the concensus position that humans are causing global warming. Many polititions react with such statements as well it's cold today, when that argument actually has a valid scientific reason behind it. Such as the polar ice caps melting which causes the environment to be cold.

Sen James Inhofe is the chair of the environmental committee. He is also one of the largest fossils fuel recipients. He used an absolute stating, there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful they can change climate.

He's using an absolute because he can't give a valid reason as to why certain effects are occuring. Why data shows up the way it does. Why animals are dieing when natural causes don't give a significant enough reason. I can disprove his reason. Trees produce oxygen. Pollution put chemicals in the air. So yes causes do produce an effect and yes humans can affect the environment. But this is the only argument he's got

Congress: Obama AdminFired Top Scientist to Advance Climate Change Plans