Lmfao Theresa mays just killed off the AGW cult department

[depotoo]

This Michael Mann-
When a journalist attempted to confirm that Mann was a Peace Prize recipient, a Nobel official said he was not. Presumably, someone then suggested it would be a good idea for the IPCC to clarify this matter.

Two weeks after Mann filed his legal papers, the IPCC issued a statement contradicting Pachauri’s 2007 proclamation. It says the prize was awarded to the IPCC as a whole “and not to any individual associated with the IPCC. Thus it is incorrect to refer to any IPCC official, or scientist who worked on IPCC reports, as a Nobel laureate or Nobel Prize winner.”

The IPCC posted the statement on its website, but it didn’t send a copy to the same list of people who received Pachauri’s earlier, erroneous message. Nor did it issue a press release.

Five years after the fact, the IPCC finally acknowledged that its chairman and others have been wearing medals made of tinfoil on their chests. But that in no way prevented The Walrus from telling its readers, months afterward, that those medals are real.

IPCC's 9,000 Nobel pretenders
ClimateGate Star Michael Mann Courts Legal Disaster

You didn't complete your first sentence. The comment came from Professor Michael Mann, currently director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University and most assuredly a scientist. The comment is nothing more than an offhand remark. The deniers here would like us to believe it is some concerted effort to end climate research. The comment was meant to point out that the evidence that the world is getting warmer has become blatantly obvious. Don't get pulled in to this Matthew, it is just more denier bullshit - the sort of bullshit one pulls up when one has no real basis with which to argue.

You didn't complete your first sentence. The comment came from Professor Michael Mann, currently director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University and most assuredly a scientist. The comment is nothing more than an offhand remark. The deniers here would like us to believe it is some concerted effort to end climate research. The comment was meant to point out that the evidence that the world is getting warmer has become blatantly obvious. Don't get pulled in to this Matthew, it is just more denier bullshit - the sort of bullshit one pulls up when one has no real basis with which to argue.

 

[jillian]

Theresa is going to be so good for the west..thank god a real leader again.


.

Now for TRUMP to be elected and we kill this green agenda here.... This lie has been alive to long..

You're funny.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Hilarious another Margaret Thatcher...


Climate change department killed off by Theresa May

You say that like its a good thing

I just realized when the old lying hag Hillary becomes president it will be her against Theresa..holy bat man that will be fun to watch

 

[Crick]

I'm glad to see you say "when", not if. Good grasp of reality there Bear.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'm glad to see you say "when", not if. Good grasp of reality there Bear.

?
I know reality you don't..

You just want to enforce social economic change like old rocks regardless of not knowing the truth.

You don't care about the truth as long as it suits your ways

 

[jc456]

I'm glad to see you say "when", not if. Good grasp of reality there Bear.

?
I know reality you don't..

You just want to enforce social economic change like old rocks regardless of not knowing the truth.

You don't care about the truth as long as it suits your ways

Well he has no truths he can use for his way. He needs made up things. It's why he can't produce any supporting evidence. Funny eh?

 

[bripat9643]

Nothing new to see here, just deniers censoring science. Move right along.

Whose being censored?

 

[Crick]

I'm glad to see you say "when", not if. Good grasp of reality there Bear.

?
I know reality you don't..

You just want to enforce social economic change like old rocks regardless of not knowing the truth.

You don't care about the truth as long as it suits your ways

And that explains why I am always on the side of mainstream science and you are always on the side of uneducated right wing bloggers.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Nothing new to see here, just deniers censoring science. Move right along.

Whose being censored?

Mooth is projecting his inner fascist

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'm glad to see you say "when", not if. Good grasp of reality there Bear.

?
I know reality you don't..

You just want to enforce social economic change like old rocks regardless of not knowing the truth.

You don't care about the truth as long as it suits your ways

And that explains why I am always on the side of mainstream science and you are always on the side of uneducated right wing bloggers.

Crick all I have been doing is playing you to get the truth out..

You don't care about science

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What Theresa May’s new cabinet really means for climate change

I thought it was called "global warming"?

5 years from now you're going to call it "top weather story" because all you guys ever do it link to the top weather story and claim an atmospheric trace element is to blame.

 

[Crick]

Ever wonder why denier attempts to argue the science always fail?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Models that ignore all variables except for a gnats facts worth of CO2 just ain't science, folks

 

[bripat9643]

Ever wonder why denier attempts to argue the science always fail?

It doesn't. Your so-called "science" has got a thousand holes the size of a semi going through it.

 

[Crick]

Science almost always has some holes in it. No proofs, remember. Now, let's look at yours.

Theories for the causation of global warming - 0
Theories for the effect of increased CO2 in the atmosphere - 0
Theories to explain the radiative imbalance at the ToA - 0
Theories to explain downward IR radiation with CO2's spectrum - 0
Proportion of climate scientists accepting "it" - > 1%

Your side seems to be a lot more hole than theory. A lot more. Particularly when you consider the nature of the people pushing it.

 

[LaDexter]

Ever wonder why denier attempts to argue the science always fail?

Remind us again

WHY DOES ONE EARTH POLAR CIRCLE, the ANTARCTIC, have 9 times the ice of the other, THE ARCTIC?


LOL!!!

Crick is used to idiots who parrot the "media skeptics" like Sallie Balunias and others who are actually just part of the FRAUD, serving up easily discredited "skeptic theories" like solar cycle.

That;'s why there is so much hate for the above question - I was supposed to be a parrot, not a follower of the Einstein methodology...

 

[Crick]

Hahahahahaaaa...

Baliunas? Jesus, you really do not know SHIT, do you.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Science almost always has some holes in it. No proofs, remember. Now, let's look at yours.

Theories for the causation of global warming - 0
Theories for the effect of increased CO2 in the atmosphere - 0
Theories to explain the radiative imbalance at the ToA - 0
Theories to explain downward IR radiation with CO2's spectrum - 0
Proportion of climate scientists accepting "it" - > 1%

Your side seems to be a lot more hole than theory. A lot more. Particularly when you consider the nature of the people pushing it.

You're assuming "Global warming" is an established fact and it's not. You monkey with the data to show this imaginary "warming" when we've had flat, if not declining temperature these past 2 decades. You tools even post chart after chart (the ones with temperature, Crick, not the one you post with no temperature axis 'proving' CO2 causes warming) showing the Pause as "proof" of -- is it global warming or climate change?

 

[Crick]

Frank, Paddie,

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Crick how did you get temperatures accurate to 1/10 of a degree back in 1880?