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.
Skook, if you'll remember, spent months spamming pictures proclaiming the inevitability of Mitt Romney's landslide win. That is, Skook is a 'tard on all issues. When he's proven to be a 'tard on one issue, he forgets his past 'tarddom there and moves on to a new issue to be a 'tard about. He shifted from his retardation about the elections to his current retardation about the global warming issue. And after he fails completely here, he'll move his retardation to a new issue. It's the cycle of Skook. Skook is such a reliable 'tard, you can be pretty sure the exact opposite of anything he says is the case.
Gipper just raves endlessly about the global socialist conspiracy, confirming his status as a hardcore cultist. However, he's going to have to work much harder to climb to the pinnacle of 'tarddom which Skook now occupies.
Whitehall? Doesn't make much sense on any topic. Seems like an bitter old FOX News junkie, using any excuse to spit mindless hate at liberals.
Eflat is new. We'll have to wait and watch to see precisely which cult symptoms he manifests. So far, he's just parroting old debunked nonsense, making him the boring sort of cultist.
Meanwhile, the rational side hasn't ever cared about Patrick Moore, or generally even heard of him. However, it seems a lot of denialists are aging hippies who used to consider Patrick Moore to be their guru. The constant thing about them is how they've always been in somebody's cult.
Skook, if you'll remember, spent months spamming pictures proclaiming the inevitability of Mitt Romney's landslide win. That is, Skook is a 'tard on all issues. When he's proven to be a 'tard on one issue, he forgets his past 'tarddom there and moves on to a new issue to be a 'tard about. He shifted from his retardation about the elections to his current retardation about the global warming issue. And after he fails completely here, he'll move his retardation to a new issue. It's the cycle of Skook. Skook is such a reliable 'tard, you can be pretty sure the exact opposite of anything he says is the case.
Gipper just raves endlessly about the global socialist conspiracy, confirming his status as a hardcore cultist. However, he's going to have to work much harder to climb to the pinnacle of 'tarddom which Skook now occupies.
Whitehall? Doesn't make much sense on any topic. Seems like an bitter old FOX News junkie, using any excuse to spit mindless hate at liberals.
Eflat is new. We'll have to wait and watch to see precisely which cult symptoms he manifests. So far, he's just parroting old debunked nonsense, making him the boring sort of cultist.
Meanwhile, the rational side hasn't ever cared about Patrick Moore, or generally even heard of him. However, it seems a lot of denialists are aging hippies who used to consider Patrick Moore to be their guru. The constant thing about them is how they've always been in somebody's cult.
Eflat is new.
We'll have to wait and watch to see precisely which cult symptoms he manifests. So far, he's just parroting old debunked nonsense, making him the boring sort of cultist.
The helpless denialist cultists stink at the science, hence the endless threads like this raging about people that nobody cares about. The endless nutty conspiracies really are the best they can do.
Denialists, why are you prolonging your agony like this? Your cult is collapsing. Either bail out with the other rats, or go down the ship.
When you can't retort with logic, reason or specificity, childish name calling is always the best course of action. Well done!
The helpless denialist cultists stink at the science, hence the endless threads like this raging about people that nobody cares about. The endless nutty conspiracies really are the best they can do.
Denialists, why are you prolonging your agony like this? Your cult is collapsing. Either bail out with the other rats, or go down the ship.
When you can't retort with logic, reason or specificity, childish name calling is always the best course of action. Well done!
Mamooth is complaining about a broad pattern of characteristic and behavior among climate change deniers. They do tend to be bad at science and spend a great deal of time complaining about irrelevant issues. They have made frequent charges that involve or require an enormous conspiracy among climate scientists.
His comments are snug enough that the folks he's talking to know precisely who they are.
A reasonable, balanced critique of temperature predictions can be found in this 2009 WSJ article, which a continued plateau (or even cooling) since then only strengthens the case of the so-called "deniers":
Something the article doesn't mention is that a modest rise in temperatures, should that ever occur, would mean plants grow more efficiently, which would be a boon to mankind.
Bottom line, for me anyway, is that I will not stand for anyone that claims ANY science is "settled". History has proven such arrogance a foolhardy claim.
If you truly believe the climate is warming and the shores will be engulfed, feel free to move inland and leave the rest of us alone.
You'll not impose central planning of energy resources, which most certainly will cost lives, because of what think may happen. Make you case for predicting the weather, fine. If it's a strong enough case, people will voluntarily adapt, as they always have.
A reasonable, balanced critique of temperature predictions can be found in this 2009 WSJ article, which a continued plateau (or even cooling) since then only strengthens the case of the so-called "deniers":
No, you will not find a balanced critique in the Wall Street Journal. By 2009, it had been the property of the News Corporation - the owner of Fox News - for two years. Even before that, you couldn't find a more business-friendly periodical on the planet. If you want scientific information, I'd strongly suggest you go to a science source. The best source for information on climate for the last decade, worldwide, has been the analysis reports of the IPCC.
Something the article doesn't mention is that a modest rise in temperatures, should that ever occur, would mean plants grow more efficiently, which would be a boon to mankind.
The net change to raising the Earth's temperature 2C over the next will most assuredly NOT be beneficial. You are an idiot to suggest otherwise.
No science is ever truly settled, but that's only because that's the way science works. There is a great deal of science that has been so widely accepted it is treated by all as fact. Among the scientifically literate and climate scientists in particular, anthropogenic global warming is so accepted.
If you truly believe the climate is warming and the shores will be engulfed, feel free to move inland and leave the rest of us alone.
If you truly believe that you can put the lives of my children and their children and their children and the children of billions of people at risk DESPITE overwhelming evidence which says you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, feel free to take a very long walk off a very short pier.
You'll not impose central planning of energy resources, which most certainly will cost lives, because of what think may happen. Make you case for predicting the weather, fine. If it's a strong enough case, people will voluntarily adapt, as they always have.
I will do whatever I feel needs doing to rectify this problem and that the laws of this country allow. I will certainly not take direction from fools like you.
Another central planner wannabe that's just SURE he knows what's best for everyone else.
Another central planner wannabe that's just SURE he knows what's best for everyone else.
Personally, I think it takes a great deal more unjustified ego to choose to reject mainstream science and ignore a very real threat to us and our descendants - than not.
"Central planner wannabe"... wow, that cuts me to the bone.
He's been truthful and the communists/globalists will now try to destroy him.What on earth?
This headline blew me away when I came across is on yes, a Breitbart site!!!
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore told a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earths atmosphere over the past 100 years.
Moreover, the Canadian ecologist, who was a member of Greenpeace from 1971-86, admitted that Greenpeace intentionally used faulty computer models and scare tactics in promoting claims man-made gases are heating up the planet. More told the Senate committee that he decided to leave Greenpeace because it was more concerned with politics than it was with the environment.
Read more w/links @ Greenpeace Founder: No Scientific Proof for Global Warming
AGU---globabist nut collection furthering the globablist agenda is a mixture of scientists (I use the term loosely) and students-----in 4 different fields and none of them involve Climatologists. Their statement like their opinion means nothing as they push their agenda.Goofball, Greenpeace is not an organization with any credibility on this subject. You want to see what organizations with real credentials are stating?
American Geophysical Union
AGU Statement on Climate Change
Human-induced climate change requires urgent action.
Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes.
“Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.
Extensive, independent observations confirm the reality of global warming. These observations show large-scale increases in air and sea temperatures, sea level, and atmospheric water vapor; they document decreases in the extent of mountain glaciers, snow cover, permafrost, and Arctic sea ice. These changes are broadly consistent with long- understood physics and predictions of how the climate system is expected to respond to human-caused increases in greenhouse gases. The changes are inconsistent with explanations of climate change that rely on known natural influences.
Climate models predict that global temperatures will continue to rise, with the amount of warming primarily determined by the level of emissions. Higher emissions of greenhouse gases will lead to larger warming, and greater risks to society and ecosystems. Some additional warming is unavoidable due to past emissions.
AGU Statement on Climate Change: Update | Environment
The fact that they agree w/ your faction of course has nothing to do w/ it. [/sarc]Goofball, Greenpeace is not an organization with any credibility on this subject. You want to see what organizations with real credentials are stating?
American Geophysical Union...
Climate change is the taking of our wealth and giving it away. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ENVIRONMENT.
We can talk about that if u want.This is a perfect example of a strawman argument. No one is suggesting that global warming will "destroy the world". We're saying that it'll cause people a lot of suffering and death.
