Koch brothers caught funding attack on science

There's no real science to AGW

And there's already a thread on this

LOL. Just because Frankieboy is a right wing fruitloop doesn't mean the rest of the world is blind, deaf, and exceptionally dumb.

For those that want real information from scientists and not flap yap reflecting the views of an obese junkie on the radio, here is real information on the subject;



AGW Observer

I'll see your AGW Observer and raise you a Schnitt List.
Read a few of the links here. Feel free to comment.

Youtube and Lindzen? Are you freikin' nuts? You think that counters peer reviewed articles in real scientific journals? Lindzen testified to Congress that tobacco was not harmful to your health, as well as his highly paid appearances stating that GHGs wear not affecting the weather. Laid out a hypothesis called the 'Iris Effect' and had it completely falsified by evidence presented by other scientists. Lindzen has almost no credibility among other scientists.
 
I suggest that you do a bit of research before you repeat the lies of the right wingnuts.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.


I see why you're outraged.

Science is about conformity and consensuses. Good science allows no dissent. We must accept what we are told, and NEVER question. Algore said it, you must believe it.

Science is blind adherence to dogma.

All praise Gaia and the holy AGW....
 
I suggest that you do a bit of research before you repeat the lies of the right wingnuts.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.


I see why you're outraged.

Science is about conformity and consensuses. Good science allows no dissent. We must accept what we are told, and NEVER question. Algore said it, you must believe it.

Science is blind adherence to dogma.

All praise Gaia and the holy AGW....

Stupid ass, the scientists that were predicting cooling were obviously wrong. And the reason the majority of them were wrong is that they overestimated the aerosol effect, and underestimated the amount of GHGs that we have put into the atmosphere since then.

However, knowing those things requires doing adaquete research, you find it so much easier just to flap ignorant yap.
 
I suggest that you do a bit of research before you repeat the lies of the right wingnuts.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.


I see why you're outraged.

Science is about conformity and consensuses. Good science allows no dissent. We must accept what we are told, and NEVER question. Algore said it, you must believe it.

Science is blind adherence to dogma.

All praise Gaia and the holy AGW....

Stupid ass, the scientists that were predicting cooling were obviously wrong. And the reason the majority of them were wrong is that they overestimated the aerosol effect, and underestimated the amount of GHGs that we have put into the atmosphere since then.

However, knowing those things requires doing adaquete research, you find it so much easier just to flap ignorant yap.

IronyMeter.gif
 
I think we have a right to question their data.
Given that they were so wrong in the 70's about us going into an ice age.

I suggest that you do a bit of research before you repeat the lies of the right wingnuts.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.

You and I both lived through the "coming ace age" scare. It's a shame you don't remember.


the same crowd, including Steven Schneider, found out that more notoriety and funding could be had by promoting GW with mankind at fault for CO2 than could be had with the Ice Age scare that would only be blamed on Nature unless atomic war was involved.

kinda similar to those herbal remedies that gauranteed increased busom size for women but then switched over to claiming penile enlargement when they found out there was more money in that market. a scam is a scam whether they really, really, really believe or not. Tinkerbell! dont die, we believe!
 
You and I both lived through the "coming ace age" scare. It's a shame you don't remember.

He remembers. The cult is too important to allow something like fact and reality slip in.

So, what is this all about?

"To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest."

- Leading greenhouse advocate, Dr Stephen Schneider
( in interview for "Discover" magazine, Oct 1989)

So, Schneider is lying, and it is he that Clinton relies on for global warming predictions.
But, what about Schneider? Isn’t he a reputable climatologist? Why should we not trust him to know best? One answer involves his position on global warming during the 70’s.

"There is a finite possibility that a serious worldwide ***cooling*** could befall the Earth within the next 100 years."
(emphasis added)

“However, the effect on surface temperature of an increase in the aerosol content of the atmosphere is found to be quite significant. An increase by a factor of 4 in the equilibrium dust concentration in the global atmosphere, which cannot be ruled out as a possibility within the next century, could decrease the mean surface temperature by as much as 3.5 deg. K. If sustained over a period of several years, such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.” (1971)

Hmmm, Dr. Schneider appears to be a bit confused. Maybe he simply examined the data and adjusted his theory.

“Looking at every bump and wiggle of the record is a waste of time - it's like trying to figure out the probability of a pair of dice by looking at the individual rolls. You've got to look at averages. So, I don't set very much store in looking at the direct evidence.“ (1991)

Since he professes disdain for evidence, maybe he simply takes a position which insures publicity.

Not to single Schneider out, those in the global warming scam are universally lacking in professional credibility. Note another “great” greenhouse gas doomsayer, Dr John Gribbin.

In the 70’s he put forth the theory that in 1982 the alignment of Jupiter would destroy Los Angeles. This is the great “California falling into the sea” hoax that was so popular at the time.

"A remarkable chain of evidence, ...points to 1982 as the year in which the Los Angeles region of the San Andreas fault will be subjected to the most massive earthquake unknown in the populated regions of the earth in this century. ... in 1982 when the Moon is in the Seventh House, and Jupiter aligns with Mars and with the other seven planets of the solar system, Los Angeles will be destroyed."

Gribbin’s book, "The Jupiter Effect" was the basis of this hoax. Now he has returned as a heavyweight of the global warming fraud.

But wait, the scientific community fully support the theory, after all, a man of no less integrity than Bill Clinton has declared that Global warming is an irrefutable fact.
 
Rich lying assholes protecting their investments, no matter what the price to the rest of us. That is the reality.

Yeah, but enough about Micheal Mann, Phil Jones and the rest of the grant whores..

Let's look at Dr Stephen Schneider...

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/

"To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest."

- Leading greenhouse advocate, Dr Stephen Schneider
( in interview for "Discover" magazine, Oct 1989)

Liars for Gaia - just like you....
 
LOL. Just because Frankieboy is a right wing fruitloop doesn't mean the rest of the world is blind, deaf, and exceptionally dumb.

For those that want real information from scientists and not flap yap reflecting the views of an obese junkie on the radio, here is real information on the subject;



AGW Observer

I'll see your AGW Observer and raise you a Schnitt List.
Read a few of the links here. Feel free to comment.

Youtube and Lindzen? Are you freikin' nuts? You think that counters peer reviewed articles in real scientific journals? Lindzen testified to Congress that tobacco was not harmful to your health, as well as his highly paid appearances stating that GHGs wear not affecting the weather. Laid out a hypothesis called the 'Iris Effect' and had it completely falsified by evidence presented by other scientists. Lindzen has almost no credibility among other scientists.

You think peer a reviewed article that excluded "peers" that might contradict predetermined results qualifys as science? You think evidence of scientific fraud can be washed away by more "peer reviewed" articles?
Sorry, Old Rocks in your head, As a scientist, I reject dishonest, prejudiced hacks that pass themselves off as "scientists" from the peer review process.
 
Stupid ass, the scientists that were predicting cooling were obviously wrong.

Fucknut cultist, Schneider was a leading priest of the AGW cult. He was whoring for free money - both when he led the Ice Age bullshit, and when he led the AGW bullshit.

Schneider never gave a fuck about facts, he wanted cash, just like Mann and Jones. Cook up wild conspiracy theories and get millions from governments to "study" them. No crises, no money. If a crisis is SO absurd as to be laughed at, such as the Ice Age fucktardary, then he can simply change it to global warming fucktardary.

And the reason the majority of them were wrong is that they overestimated the aerosol effect, and underestimated the amount of GHGs that we have put into the atmosphere since then.

The reason they were "wrong"is that it was utter bullshit, fabricated to get grants. Just like the AGW bullshit that you push.

Only difference is that Mann, Jones and Schneider KNEW it was bullshit, a scam to grift billions.

Fucktards like you actually believe the idiocy. Trust me, the priests laugh their asses off at morons like you.

However, knowing those things requires doing adaquete research, you find it so much easier just to flap ignorant yap.

Research "adequate" to get a Ferrari, invites to Hollywood premiers and parties, and an exclusive address with servants.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top