The definitive guide to the "Global Warming" scam

[P@triot]

Ohhhhh Mammaries (mamooth)!!! This one is really going to sting.

The coalition’s leadership and members are a who’s who of leading scientists studying carbon dioxide and climate change, including atmospheric physicists, climatologists, ecologists, statisticians, and energy experts.

Each one bolded is a scientist. Here's the thing sweetie, you were duped. It's ok. But the sooner you get over your ego and own that, the sooner you'll stop looking like a fool. You can choose not to continue to be a mindless minion for their cause.

Climate Scientists Targeted By Social Media Censors

The CO2 Coalition has been the target of social media censors and left-leaning activists because of its position on climate change.

www.dailysignal.com

 

[mamooth]

Ohhhhh Mammaries!!! This one is really going to sting.

Awww, my bottom craves my attention again. That's sweet. I know how he missed his daily spankings.

The coalition’s leadership and members are a who’s who of leading scientists studying carbon dioxide and climate change, including atmospheric physicists, climatologists, ecologists, statisticians, and energy experts.

So, another propaganda piece signed by the usual group of paid shills. You need to understand that you getting duped makes you look bad, not the normal people.

Here's a thought. Instead of relying on a bad Appeal To Authority fallacy and whining about your victimhood, why not .... discuss the science yourself?

AAHHAHAHAHAHHAHHHAHHAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHA.

I slay me. I mean, just the thought of P@triot discussing the science. I think everyone busted a gut when I suggested that, given how outlandish the concept is.

 

[ReinyDays]

Climate Scientists Targeted By Social Media Censors

The CO2 Coalition has been the target of social media censors and left-leaning activists because of its position on climate change.

www.dailysignal.com

"There is broad agreement in this diverse group that the 130 part-per-million increase in carbon dioxide over the past 150 years is not in any way harmful."

No they don't ... fake news ... just because you want to believe it doesn't make it true ...

 

[ding]

Are we to understand that you agree that reducing GHG emissions will reduce global warming?

Reduce global warming? I want to increase it.

 

[P@triot]

Climate Scientists Targeted By Social Media Censors

The CO2 Coalition has been the target of social media censors and left-leaning activists because of its position on climate change.

www.dailysignal.com

"There is broad agreement in this diverse group that the 130 part-per-million increase in carbon dioxide over the past 150 years is not in any way harmful."

No they don't ... fake news ... just because you want to believe it doesn't make it true ...

“No they don’t”

Now the left has become so bat-shit crazy that they want to tell the CO2 Coalition how they think

 

[ReinyDays]

No they don't ... fake news ... just because you want to believe it doesn't make it true ...

“No they don’t”

Now the left has become so bat-shit crazy that they want to tell the CO2 Coalition how they think

Most climatologists say "we don't know yet" ... anyone who says they do know haven't published their research yet ... CO2 Coalition can read the scripts they're given (for pay) all they want to ... doesn't make their claims valid ...

"Harmful" isn't defined in science ... strictly a philosophical term ... but hey, P@triot, you're made of money, go ahead and set your thermostat to 92ºF ... I'll keep burning tires and American Flags ... we'll certainly know the temperatures we'll see in 100 years, in 100 years ... that's a sure thing ...

 

[P@triot]

I'll keep burning tires and American Flags ... we'll certainly know the temperatures we'll see in 100 years, in 100 years ... that's a sure thing ...

We don’t have to wait 100 years. You bat-shit crazy leftists said that NYC would be under the ocean at least five years before 2020. Is NYC under the ocean right now?

You people also said that the polar ice-cap would be completely melted by 2014. By the end of 2014, the polar ice-cap had expanded a mind-boggling 60% (over 900,000 sq. miles).

 

[ReinyDays]

I'll keep burning tires and American Flags ... we'll certainly know the temperatures we'll see in 100 years, in 100 years ... that's a sure thing ...

We don’t have to wait 100 years. You bat-shit crazy leftists said that NYC would be under the ocean at least five years before 2020. Is NYC under the ocean right now?

You people also said that the polar ice-cap would be completely melted by 2014. By the end of 2014, the polar ice-cap had expanded a mind-boggling 60% (over 900,000 sq. miles).

I don't know who you've been listening to ... you should be ashamed of yourself for believing it ... maybe you shouldn't be bragging about this ...

 

[ding]

C'mon 580!

 

[Crick]

I'll keep burning tires and American Flags ... we'll certainly know the temperatures we'll see in 100 years, in 100 years ... that's a sure thing ...

We don’t have to wait 100 years. You bat-shit crazy leftists said that NYC would be under the ocean at least five years before 2020. Is NYC under the ocean right now?

You people also said that the polar ice-cap would be completely melted by 2014. By the end of 2014, the polar ice-cap had expanded a mind-boggling 60% (over 900,000 sq. miles).

The actual data:

As you can see, the reason for the 60% increase was a massive, multiyear loss that was what produced the 2014 prediction. The long term trend is unchanged, still downward and these data indicate we will have an ice free summer by approximately 2025.

 

[ReinyDays]

The actual data:

How are you getting actual data from 100 years in the future? ...

 

[Sunsettommy]

I'll keep burning tires and American Flags ... we'll certainly know the temperatures we'll see in 100 years, in 100 years ... that's a sure thing ...

We don’t have to wait 100 years. You bat-shit crazy leftists said that NYC would be under the ocean at least five years before 2020. Is NYC under the ocean right now?

You people also said that the polar ice-cap would be completely melted by 2014. By the end of 2014, the polar ice-cap had expanded a mind-boggling 60% (over 900,000 sq. miles).

The actual data:
View attachment 422593

As you can see, the reason for the 60% increase was a massive, multiyear loss that was what produced the 2014 prediction. The long term trend is unchanged, still downward and these data indicate we will have an ice free summer by approximately 2025.

Your link free post is misleading since the decline stopped after 2006, it is obvious in reading YOUR undersized chart.

Meanwhile Polar Bears and Seal population increased greatly for many years, no sign of calamity.

 

[P@triot]

The entire planet was shut down in 2020...resulting in a decrease of only 13%. And yet the left-wing imbeciles want a 50% decline in emissions.

Biden's Climate Denialism

Biden says the U.S. has a "moral imperative" to try to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% from 2005 levels by 2030.

www.dailysignal.com

 

[Billy_Bob]

The entire planet was shut down in 2020...resulting in a decrease of only 13%. And yet the left-wing imbeciles want a 50% decline in emissions.

Biden's Climate Denialism

Biden says the U.S. has a "moral imperative" to try to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% from 2005 levels by 2030.

www.dailysignal.com

The rate of decline is three times the rate we already did over the last 20 years.. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN THIS RATE... We could stop using ALL fossil fuels today and not reach this level of reduction..

 

[Crick]

The entire planet was shut down in 2020...resulting in a decrease of only 13%. And yet the left-wing imbeciles want a 50% decline in emissions.

Biden's Climate Denialism

Biden says the U.S. has a "moral imperative" to try to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% from 2005 levels by 2030.

www.dailysignal.com

The rate of decline is three times the rate we already did over the last 20 years.. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN THIS RATE... We could stop using ALL fossil fuels today and not reach this level of reduction..

Then we'd better get busy, eh.

 

[P@triot]

The entire planet was shut down in 2020...resulting in a decrease of only 13%. And yet the left-wing imbeciles want a 50% decline in emissions.

Biden's Climate Denialism

Biden says the U.S. has a "moral imperative" to try to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% from 2005 levels by 2030.

www.dailysignal.com

The rate of decline is three times the rate we already did over the last 20 years.. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN THIS RATE... We could stop using ALL fossil fuels today and not reach this level of reduction..

Then we'd better get busy, eh.

“Get busy” doing something that cannot be done and doesn’t need to be done?

 

[Crick]

That 13% decline took place with increased electrical consumption and no related change in energy or transportation technology beyond was had already been underway. Continued movement towards EV transportation and alternative energy sources can achieve Biden's emissions targets. Cutting those emissions IS a moral imperative.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The data is overwhelming. The history is indisputable. The lies have all been captured.

A study in the journal Nature Climate Change reviewed 117 climate predictions and found that 97.4% never materialized.

• Biologist Paul Ehrlich predicted in the 1970s that: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” and that “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
• In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
• In January 2006 Al Gore predicted that we had ten years left before the planet turned into a “total frying pan.” We made it.
• In 2008, a segment aired on ABC News predicted that NYC would be under water by June 2015.
• In 1970, ecologist Kenneth E.F. Wattpredicted that “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000, This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.”
• In 2008, Al Gore predicted that there is a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap would be completely melted within 5-7 years. He at least hedged that prediction by giving himself “75%” certainty. By 2014 - the polar ice cap had expanded over 60% (more than 900,000 sq miles)
• On May 13th 2014 France’s foreign minister said that we only have 500 days to stop “climate chaos.” The recent Paris climate summit met 565 days after his remark.
• In 2009, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center head James Wassen warned that Obama only had four years left to save the earth.
• On the first Earth Day its sponsor warned that “in 25 years, somewhere between 75% and 80% of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”
• And another Earth Day prediction from Kenneth Watt: “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

Top 10 Climate Change Predictions Gone Spectacularly Wrong; This Is EPIC!

“A reliable way to make people believe in falsehoods is frequent repetition, because familiarity is not easily distinguished from truth. Authoritarian institutions and marketers have always known this fact.”
― Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow

 

[Crick]

The entire planet was shut down in 2020...resulting in a decrease of only 13%. And yet the left-wing imbeciles want a 50% decline in emissions.

Biden's Climate Denialism

Biden says the U.S. has a "moral imperative" to try to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% from 2005 levels by 2030.

www.dailysignal.com

The rate of decline is three times the rate we already did over the last 20 years.. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN THIS RATE... We could stop using ALL fossil fuels today and not reach this level of reduction..

Billy... silly mistake. You seem to have confused emissions with atmospheric content. If we completely stopped burning fossil fuels today, our emissions would be very close to zero.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That 13% decline took place with increased electrical consumption and no related change in energy or transportation technology beyond was had already been underway. Continued movement towards EV transportation and alternative energy sources can achieve Biden's emissions targets. Cutting those emissions IS a moral imperative.

Did you tell the ChiComs?