When will it be too late?

[Old Rocks]

.................................

So, we have another dumb fuck that gets his science from Time and other news magazines. Ever hear of peer reviewed scientific journals?

Yeah, they heard of those back in the 70s when the almighty 'Scientific Community' was sure we were headed for another ice age by now. And of course these days 'peer reviewed' means 'filtered to purge any views that dissent from the story we are making so much money off.'

OK, be branded for the liar you are.

What 1970s science said about global cooling

A new paper exposing the myth of 70s global cooling
Over time, William Connelly has been steadily documenting 70s research predicting global cooling. It's a rich resource but as he admits, could be more accessible. Now he has collaborated with Thomas Peterson and Jr the liar you are.ohn Fleck to publish The Myth of the 1970's Global Cooling Scientific Consensus, due to be published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.

The paper surveys climate studies from 1965 to 1979 (and in a refreshing change to other similar surveys, lists all the papers). They find very few papers (7 in total) predict global cooling. This isn't surprising. What surprises is that even in the 1970s, on the back of 3 decades of cooling, more papers (42 in total) predict global warming due to CO2 than cooling.

 

[Old Rocks]

What happens when AGW researchers like James Hansen get caught with their grubby paws in the cookie jar? Well, in real life, nothing - just like other crooked religious leaders.

But what SHOULD happen?

So you are fucking willfull ignoramous. And will expend every effort to stay that way, including lying about people that are vastly more intelligent and better people than you are.

In the meantime, you are cursing scientists while posting on the internet with a computer. And are too stupid even to recognize the irony.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you are fucking willfull ignoramous. And will expend every effort to stay that way, including lying about people that are vastly more intelligent and better people than you are.

Son, my Dingo is vastly more intelligent than you are. One does not gain intellect nor wisdom from joining and dogmatically following a cult, as you have done.

In the meantime, you are cursing scientists

I am?

Which ones?

Oh Hanson? He's a conman - you're just too stupid to grasp it. he's the Benny Hinn of the AGW cult.

while posting on the internet with a computer. And are too stupid even to recognize the irony.

Damn, I guess Anthropogenic Global Warming created computers, just like Algore created the internet...

You're an idiot who seeks to appear wise by spouting the dogma of a cult.

 

[laughinReaper]

So, we have another dumb fuck that gets his science from Time and other news magazines. Ever hear of peer reviewed scientific journals?

Ever hear of critical thought, fluffy?

AWWW fluffy is cute,looks a little hot though...

The sheep not Old Rocks, he sounds kinda scruffy not fluffy.

Whether you believe in global warming our not you have to admit that it's off lately. It may or may not be man made but something wicked this way comes. It may be we are coming close to a natural occurance that maybe happens outside the memory of man. What ever it is it's pretty f***ed up.

 

[westwall]

So, we have another dumb fuck that gets his science from Time and other news magazines. Ever hear of peer reviewed scientific journals?

Ever hear of critical thought, fluffy?

AWWW fluffy is cute,looks a little hot though...

The sheep not Old Rocks, he sounds kinda scruffy not fluffy.

Whether you believe in global warming our not you have to admit that it's off lately. It may or may not be man made but something wicked this way comes. It may be we are coming close to a natural occurance that maybe happens outside the memory of man. What ever it is it's pretty f***ed up.

Look up the Great Drowning of 1632. Look up almost any year and type in storm. You will find that almost every year going back as far as there is a written record they have been saying the exact same thing. Man has a very short lifespan and commensurately short memory. Anything beyond 20 years is ancient history to most people.

 

[Unkotare]

So, we have another dumb fuck that gets his science from Time and other news magazines. Ever hear of peer reviewed scientific journals?

Yeah, they heard of those back in the 70s when the almighty 'Scientific Community' was sure we were headed for another ice age by now. And of course these days 'peer reviewed' means 'filtered to purge any views that dissent from the story we are making so much money off.'

OK, be branded for the liar you are.

What 1970s science said about global cooling

A new paper exposing the myth of 70s global cooling
Over time, William Connelly has been steadily documenting 70s research predicting global cooling. It's a rich resource but as he admits, could be more accessible. Now he has collaborated with Thomas Peterson and Jr the liar you are.ohn Fleck to publish The Myth of the 1970's Global Cooling Scientific Consensus, due to be published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.

The paper surveys climate studies from 1965 to 1979 (and in a refreshing change to other similar surveys, lists all the papers). They find very few papers (7 in total) predict global cooling. This isn't surprising. What surprises is that even in the 1970s, on the back of 3 decades of cooling, more papers (42 in total) predict global warming due to CO2 than cooling.

And just wait till you see what they have to say about the business of global warming orthodoxy 40 years from now.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yeah, they heard of those back in the 70s when the almighty 'Scientific Community' was sure we were headed for another ice age by now. And of course these days 'peer reviewed' means 'filtered to purge any views that dissent from the story we are making so much money off.'

OK, be branded for the liar you are.

What 1970s science said about global cooling

A new paper exposing the myth of 70s global cooling
Over time, William Connelly has been steadily documenting 70s research predicting global cooling. It's a rich resource but as he admits, could be more accessible. Now he has collaborated with Thomas Peterson and Jr the liar you are.ohn Fleck to publish The Myth of the 1970's Global Cooling Scientific Consensus, due to be published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.

The paper surveys climate studies from 1965 to 1979 (and in a refreshing change to other similar surveys, lists all the papers). They find very few papers (7 in total) predict global cooling. This isn't surprising. What surprises is that even in the 1970s, on the back of 3 decades of cooling, more papers (42 in total) predict global warming due to CO2 than cooling.

And just wait till you see what they have to say about the business of global warming orthodoxy 40 years from now.

40 years from now they will be talking about the assholes that could not recognize reality and prevented even preperation for consequences. And what they say will not be complimentary.

 

[Unkotare]

OK, be branded for the liar you are.

What 1970s science said about global cooling

A new paper exposing the myth of 70s global cooling
Over time, William Connelly has been steadily documenting 70s research predicting global cooling. It's a rich resource but as he admits, could be more accessible. Now he has collaborated with Thomas Peterson and Jr the liar you are.ohn Fleck to publish The Myth of the 1970's Global Cooling Scientific Consensus, due to be published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.

The paper surveys climate studies from 1965 to 1979 (and in a refreshing change to other similar surveys, lists all the papers). They find very few papers (7 in total) predict global cooling. This isn't surprising. What surprises is that even in the 1970s, on the back of 3 decades of cooling, more papers (42 in total) predict global warming due to CO2 than cooling.

And just wait till you see what they have to say about the business of global warming orthodoxy 40 years from now.

40 years from now they will be talking about the assholes that could not recognize reality and prevented even preperation for consequences. And what they say will not be complimentary.

Yeah, and 40 years ago some assholes with an agenda or a buck to make said the same thing about anyone who wasn't 'sure' we'd all be under glaciers by now. Chumps like you are nothing new.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

LOL!!! Logic is now a "thought processing error"?!?! Sorry, AGW has been proven. The only questions remaning are "when" and "how bad".

Sorry to have to call you a liar konradv, but alas, you are a liar. AGW has not been proven. In fact, it has not even been elevated to the level of a theory. AGW remains a piss poor hypothesis lacking a single shred of hard, observable, repeatable evidence that provides a hard link between the activities of man and the changing climate.

I already showed you that there has been no decrease in outgoing LW radiation since 1970 according to the satellite record in spite of a marked increase in atmospheric CO2. The facts simply don't support the AGW claims.

But once again, if you believe there is proof that provides a hard link between the activities of man and the changing climate or that there is anything going on in the climate today that is outside the boundries of natural variability, feel free to post your proof.

By the way, a claim that it has been posted rather than an actual posting will only tend to reinforce my claim that you are a liar.

So says an anamous message board poster. In the meantime, all the Scientific Societies in the world, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities state AGW is a fact and a clear and present danger to all of us.

Oh, who to believe??????????????

All of them? All of us?

 

[Old Rocks]

Sorry to have to call you a liar konradv, but alas, you are a liar. AGW has not been proven. In fact, it has not even been elevated to the level of a theory. AGW remains a piss poor hypothesis lacking a single shred of hard, observable, repeatable evidence that provides a hard link between the activities of man and the changing climate.

I already showed you that there has been no decrease in outgoing LW radiation since 1970 according to the satellite record in spite of a marked increase in atmospheric CO2. The facts simply don't support the AGW claims.

But once again, if you believe there is proof that provides a hard link between the activities of man and the changing climate or that there is anything going on in the climate today that is outside the boundries of natural variability, feel free to post your proof.

By the way, a claim that it has been posted rather than an actual posting will only tend to reinforce my claim that you are a liar.

So says an anamous message board poster. In the meantime, all the Scientific Societies in the world, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities state AGW is a fact and a clear and present danger to all of us.

Oh, who to believe??????????????

All of them? All of us?

And your level of expertise in this field is?

 

[percysunshine]

It is time to tell the truth. The climate was not born in Hawaii.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So says an anamous message board poster. In the meantime, all the Scientific Societies in the world, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities state AGW is a fact and a clear and present danger to all of us.

Oh, who to believe??????????????

All of them? All of us?

And your level of expertise in this field is?

I know when one side tries to shut down the debate saying there is a consensus, they're lying.
I know when the only solution is to spend trillions for minimal, unproven benefit, I know the liar is a leftist.

 

[skookerasbil]

All of them? All of us?

And your level of expertise in this field is?

I know when one side tries to shut down the debate saying there is a consensus, they're lying.
I know when the only solution is to spend trillions for minimal, unproven benefit, I know the liar is a leftist.

Indeed and well put.......but no worries here. These people are losing in sound fashion. The reason? They never want to face answering the question, "At what cost?". Fortunately for the majority.........they do the math, and we dont have to worry about these fuckkers fubaring the future of our kids.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And your level of expertise in this field is?

I know when one side tries to shut down the debate saying there is a consensus, they're lying.
I know when the only solution is to spend trillions for minimal, unproven benefit, I know the liar is a leftist.

Indeed and well put.......but no worries here. These people are losing in sound fashion. The reason? They never want to face answering the question, "At what cost?". Fortunately for the majority.........they do the math, and we dont have to worry about these fuckkers fubaring the future of our kids.

Liberals are bad at math, especially when it involves OPM.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/oct/30/economy.uk

 

[RetiredGySgt]

All one needs to know is that there has been no appreciable warming since 1998. 14 years. And that the entire claim of man made global warming was over 1/3 of a degree raise in 20 years.

They INSIST CO2 caused the temps to go up, yet the CO2 has steadily risen since 1998 with no responding rise in temps.

 

[rdean]

Republicans are hoping for that. They call it the "End Times". It's when Jesus comes back and takes good people to Heaven.

 

[westwall]

Stern report: the key points | Politics | guardian.co.uk

Jeez you are desperate aren't you? An article from 2006? Get real, CLIMATEGATES 1&2 have put that crap to bed. Just wait for CLIMATEGATES 3 through 30.

 

[percysunshine]

Republicans are hoping for that. They call it the "End Times". It's when Jesus comes back and takes good people to Heaven.

Sometimes Jesus just repossesses them and takes them to a bank.