LMAO....the 97% claim was taken from ONE study!!!

[skookerasbil]

Im laughing my balls off.........the whole 97% claim? These frauds took this from one single study that is humongously flawed. But that doesn't matter to these frauds.

Climate change Mr. Obama 97 percent of experts is a bogus number Fox News

The 97 percent claim was taken from a study paper by Australian John Cook, Climate Communications Fellow for the Global change Institute at the University of Queensland, and his colleagues, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters in May, 2013. The paper says nothing about the would-be dangers of climate change and it counts the number of publications, rather than the number of scientists, in support of human-made climate change. Never let facts get in the way of a good story.





ghey

 

[Mr. H.]

Facts do not rule the day with Liberals and environmentals.
Fear and emotion do.

 

[Manonthestreet]

who'd a thunk........science is so corrupt according to Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine 50% is outright fraud

 

[Billy_Bob]

Legates Et Al...

 

[skookerasbil]

Legates Et Al...

What a bunch of frauds.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Legates Et Al...

What a bunch of frauds.

The Cook Et Al paper was the exact definition of cherry picking data to meet your preconceived outcome..

 

[TheOldSchool]

Ah it's been a while...

 

[Billy_Bob]

Ah it's been a while...

Says the liberal who wouldn't know science if it bit him on the ass.. You and Old Crock or are you a sock?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Ah it's been a while...

Says the liberal who wouldn't know science if it bit him on the ass.. You and Old Crock or are you a sock?

Pray to God for the answer; I'm sure he'll tell you!

 

[skookerasbil]

Ah it's been a while...

Like Ive said s0n..........the science isn't mattering. You cant post up one single link that shows us where the science is mattering!!!




So really................who's the [URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/dickhead-3.jpg.html][/URL] s0n???

 

[TheOldSchool]

Ah it's been a while...

Like Ive said s0n..........the science isn't mattering. You cant post up one single link that shows us where the science is mattering!!!




So really................who's the s0n???

It matters to everyone but you rubes, s0n!

But G0d will h@ndle i+ righ+ s0n?

 

[skookerasbil]

Ah it's been a while...

Like Ive said s0n..........the science isn't mattering. You cant post up one single link that shows us where the science is mattering!!!




So really................who's the s0n???

It matters to everyone but you rubes, s0n!

But G0d will h@ndle i+ righ+ s0n?

link please???

 

[skookerasbil]

[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/dickhead-3.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[TheOldSchool]

Ah it's been a while...

Like Ive said s0n..........the science isn't mattering. You cant post up one single link that shows us where the science is mattering!!!




So really................who's the s0n???

It matters to everyone but you rubes, s0n!

But G0d will h@ndle i+ righ+ s0n?

link please???

Wh@t kind of l7nk s0n? Clim@te ch@nge that'$ h@ppening? 0r pe0ple c0ncerned @b0ut clim@te ch@nge?

 

[Old Rocks]

There are a lot of Scientific Societies in the world, name one that disputes AGW. All first world nations and most second world nations, and even some third world nations have National Academies of Science. Name one that disputes AGW. Name one major University that does. Looks like the 97% is pretty well covered, and then some.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There are a lot of Scientific Societies in the world, name one that disputes AGW. All first world nations and most second world nations, and even some third world nations have National Academies of Science. Name one that disputes AGW. Name one major University that does. Looks like the 97% is pretty well covered, and then some.

Planet Earth and science labs reject agw

 

[Old Rocks]

There are a lot of Scientific Societies in the world, name one that disputes AGW. All first world nations and most second world nations, and even some third world nations have National Academies of Science. Name one that disputes AGW. Name one major University that does. Looks like the 97% is pretty well covered, and then some.

Planet Earth and science labs reject agw

Now Frankie Boy, better just restrict yourself to speaking for your hollow moon. The Earth is a rather large subject for a small mind. As for the science labs, perhaps you could link us a few, right? No, you cannot, because they exist only in your fevered mind.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There are a lot of Scientific Societies in the world, name one that disputes AGW. All first world nations and most second world nations, and even some third world nations have National Academies of Science. Name one that disputes AGW. Name one major University that does. Looks like the 97% is pretty well covered, and then some.

Planet Earth and science labs reject agw

Now Frankie Boy, better just restrict yourself to speaking for your hollow moon. The Earth is a rather large subject for a small mind. As for the science labs, perhaps you could link us a few, right? No, you cannot, because they exist only in your fevered mind.

You should go back to Global Cooling, at least Planet Earth supports that theory

 

[Stephanie]

Progressives/Demcorats has no problems LYING if it's for THEIR AGENDA

the sad part is. When the American people can't tell or care about it and regurgitates back AT US AS if it's the TRUTH

They know there are many sheep out there

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There are a lot of Scientific Societies in the world, name one that disputes AGW. All first world nations and most second world nations, and even some third world nations have National Academies of Science. Name one that disputes AGW. Name one major University that does. Looks like the 97% is pretty well covered, and then some.

Planet Earth and science labs reject agw

Now Frankie Boy, better just restrict yourself to speaking for your hollow moon. The Earth is a rather large subject for a small mind. As for the science labs, perhaps you could link us a few, right? No, you cannot, because they exist only in your fevered mind.

Since you're avoiding answering in the other thread and want to try to hide here....

Old Rock doing his frightened squid imitation and trying to run away behind a cloud of black ink. The latest theory to fall was the "Double Whack", which has some Mars sized object hitting into Earth to shake loose the material to make the Moon, then hitting the material to stabilize the impossible orbit. The problem with that is it was just concluded that there no evidence of any third object: the Earth and Moon are made of identical material, think Adam's Rib

"The best possible explanation for the Moon is observational error, the Moon doesn't exist" -- Irwin Shapiro. Harvard Astrophysicist

"The Moon is bigger than it should be, apparently older than it should be and much lighter in mass than it should be. It occupies an unlikely orbit and is so extraordinary that all existing explanations for its presence are fraught with difficulties are none of them could be considered remotely watertight." -- Irwin Shapiro. Harvard Astrophysicist

"If the astronomical data are reduced, it is found that the data require that the interior of the moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere." -- Gordon MacDonald, NASA

"the Lunar Orbiter experiments vastly improved our knowledge of the moon’s gravitational field... indicating the frightening possibility thatthe moon might be hollow." Sean C Solomon, MIT

"It’s too big to have been captured by the Earth. The chances of such a capture having been effected and the moon then having taken up nearly circular orbit around our Earth are too small to make such an eventuality credible." -- Issac Asimov

Far more real science behind the notion that the Moon may be a hollow, artificial sphere than there is for "Global Climate Warming Change"