4 Reasons Why 'Climate Change' Is a Flat-Out Hoax

[rightwinger]

For some reason.....Scientists from around the world concur on manmade climate change

Only Republicans and Oil Companies disagree

For some reason satellite instruments also disagree,( maybe the oil companies paid for them?):
Solar Storm Dumps Gigawatts into Earth's Upper Atmosphere | Science Mission Directorate

"For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO, the two most efficient coolants in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95% of that total back into space."
Every one of the "scientists" you believe claims that 50% of the energy absorbed by greenhouse gases is re-radiated down and 50 % up and out....not 95% up and out as SABER registered.

No, Cientists do not claim man is the ONLY freak’n contributor

Where do we get these morons?

 

[Old Rocks]

For some reason.....Scientists from around the world concur on manmade climate change

Only Republicans and Oil Companies disagree

Actually oil companies like Exxon and BP agree that global warming is real and the result of the burning of fossil fuels.

Again, Prove you're assertion...

Parroting left wing BS doesn't make it true..

Damn, you continue to be such a stupid ignorant ****, Silly Billy.

Our position | ExxonMobil

Our position on climate change


We have the same concerns as people everywhere – and that is how to provide the world with the energy it needs while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The risk of climate change is clear and the risk warrants action. Increasing carbon emissions in the atmosphere are having a warming effect. There is a broad scientific and policy consensus that action must be taken to further quantify and assess the risks.

ExxonMobil is taking action by reducing greenhouse gas emissions in its operations, helping consumers reduce their emissions, supporting research that leads to technology breakthroughs and participating in constructive dialogue on policy options.

Addressing climate change, providing economic opportunity and lifting billions out of poverty are complex and interrelated issues requiring complex solutions. There is a consensus that comprehensive strategies are needed to respond to these risks.

 

[AZGAL]

FYI: Not all conservatives think like robots and groupthink. Some conservatives follow a protocol of respect for God's green earth. It is also a good idea to listen to an effort by many scientists to inform humanity of important issues.

 

[AZGAL]

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist.

everyone including electrical engineers should take steps to pollute less

 

[polarbear]

Hahaha look at the panic in the chickenlittle coup. All the hens are cackling because their rooster Hansen is no longer at NASA to emasculate it. And now thanks to SABER and soon more missions tasked to investigate their fairy tail CO2 monster they hoped would keep the fox in check dematerialized.

 

[Billy_Bob]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

Can you be more specific.

Let's start at the beginning.

Is the earth getting warmer or cooler right now?

Cooler..
View attachment 222461

And its cyclical in its behavior..

View attachment 222463

And its about to get MUCH colder... Our interglacial is about over if it is not already as a temp spike precedes rapid cooling into the next glacial cycle. That happened in 1998...

So in the last 100 years sense the earth is getting cooler you are telling me?

Or are you saying its warming up but be prepared for a long term cooling cycle?

Wow... Another idiot who likes "snipit" looks starting in the LIA and looking only at that section of a warming planet. All while ignoring the massive cool down that came in the 1300's...

Its people like you who think we have somehow stopped natural forces and now everything is man made.. Your a dupe!

As I said before, provide just one observed and verifiable scientific fact which proves your speculation of man caused anything which rules out natural variation.

 

[Toronado3800]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

Can you be more specific.

Let's start at the beginning.

Is the earth getting warmer or cooler right now?

Cooler..
View attachment 222461

And its cyclical in its behavior..

View attachment 222463

And its about to get MUCH colder... Our interglacial is about over if it is not already as a temp spike precedes rapid cooling into the next glacial cycle. That happened in 1998...

So in the last 100 years sense the earth is getting cooler you are telling me?

Or are you saying its warming up but be prepared for a long term cooling cycle?

Wow... Another idiot who likes "snipit" looks starting in the LIA and looking only at that section of a warming planet. All while ignoring the massive cool down that came in the 1300's...

Its people like you who think we have somehow stopped natural forces and now everything is man made.. Your a dupe!

As I said before, provide just one observed and verifiable scientific fact which proves your speculation of man caused anything which rules out natural variation.

You're a name caller with poor use of punctuation! lol. If we are just throwing insults.

So back to the matter at hand, what do greenhouse gasses do in your world?

 

[Sunsettommy]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

Now hear this:

‘Sobering’ New UN Report Challenges Republican Climate Hawks’ Free-Market Dogma | HuffPost

I am 71 hears old and I actually fear reincarnation more than death and this is why. I do not want to come back into a world on fire, plagued by drought, extreme weather, and famine That is where we are headed. The pig headed and greedy conservatives had better wake up and realize that they can't kill the earth for short term profits which is exactly what this is all about.

Younger people had better wake the **** up and think about their future regardless of their spiritual beliefs

A landmark new United Nations report warning of catastrophic global warming doesn’t seem to have shaken many Republican climate hawks’ faith that market tweaks alone can deliver the unprecedented emissions cuts needed to avert disaster.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a U.N. consortium of researchers from 40 countries, said Sunday the reductions needed to avoid average global warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels require “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.”

“The only force that I know of on the planet that can deliver innovation as quickly as we need it is the free enterprise system,” said former Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.), now the executive director of RepublicEn, a group urging Republicans to support a ca

And please spare us the hysterical horsesit which I can already hear about the evil UN plotting to usurp our soverenty and establish a one world government . Get the **** over it.

LMFAO you posting about reincarnation as proof man made climate change is real ?



What a LGBT dofus..

No bubba. Do you have a reading problem.?? That is not what I said at all.

Do YOU have a thinking problem? the current warming trend very similar to PREVIOUS warming trends back to the mid 1800's. There are FEWER landfalling hurricanes and Tornadoes than usual in the last decade. Increasing cold/snow in recent decades, decreasing wildfire and flood deaths.

Alarmist/Warmists have failed to show evidence that CO2 is a driver of climate, which of course isn't surprising since it doesn't exist.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

Now hear this:

‘Sobering’ New UN Report Challenges Republican Climate Hawks’ Free-Market Dogma | HuffPost

I am 71 hears old and I actually fear reincarnation more than death and this is why. I do not want to come back into a world on fire, plagued by drought, extreme weather, and famine That is where we are headed. The pig headed and greedy conservatives had better wake up and realize that they can't kill the earth for short term profits which is exactly what this is all about.

Younger people had better wake the **** up and think about their future regardless of their spiritual beliefs

A landmark new United Nations report warning of catastrophic global warming doesn’t seem to have shaken many Republican climate hawks’ faith that market tweaks alone can deliver the unprecedented emissions cuts needed to avert disaster.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a U.N. consortium of researchers from 40 countries, said Sunday the reductions needed to avoid average global warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels require “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.”

“The only force that I know of on the planet that can deliver innovation as quickly as we need it is the free enterprise system,” said former Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.), now the executive director of RepublicEn, a group urging Republicans to support a ca

And please spare us the hysterical horsesit which I can already hear about the evil UN plotting to usurp our soverenty and establish a one world government . Get the **** over it.

LMFAO you posting about reincarnation as proof man made climate change is real ?



What a LGBT dofus..

No bubba. Do you have a reading problem.?? That is not what I said at all.

Do YOU have a thinking problem? the current warming trend very similar to PREVIOUS warming trends back to the mid 1800's. There are FEWER landfalling hurricanes and Tornadoes than usual in the last decade. Increasing cold/snow in recent decades, decreasing wildfire and flood deaths.

Alarmist/Warmists have failed to show evidence that CO2 is a driver of climate, which of course isn't surprising since it doesn't exist.

Unless you can provide a source for that it is nothing more than an appeal to ignorance.

 

[Sunsettommy]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

Now hear this:

‘Sobering’ New UN Report Challenges Republican Climate Hawks’ Free-Market Dogma | HuffPost

I am 71 hears old and I actually fear reincarnation more than death and this is why. I do not want to come back into a world on fire, plagued by drought, extreme weather, and famine That is where we are headed. The pig headed and greedy conservatives had better wake up and realize that they can't kill the earth for short term profits which is exactly what this is all about.

Younger people had better wake the **** up and think about their future regardless of their spiritual beliefs

A landmark new United Nations report warning of catastrophic global warming doesn’t seem to have shaken many Republican climate hawks’ faith that market tweaks alone can deliver the unprecedented emissions cuts needed to avert disaster.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a U.N. consortium of researchers from 40 countries, said Sunday the reductions needed to avoid average global warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels require “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.”

“The only force that I know of on the planet that can deliver innovation as quickly as we need it is the free enterprise system,” said former Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.), now the executive director of RepublicEn, a group urging Republicans to support a ca

And please spare us the hysterical horsesit which I can already hear about the evil UN plotting to usurp our soverenty and establish a one world government . Get the **** over it.

LMFAO you posting about reincarnation as proof man made climate change is real ?



What a LGBT dofus..

No bubba. Do you have a reading problem.?? That is not what I said at all.

Do YOU have a thinking problem? the current warming trend very similar to PREVIOUS warming trends back to the mid 1800's. There are FEWER landfalling hurricanes and Tornadoes than usual in the last decade. Increasing cold/snow in recent decades, decreasing wildfire and flood deaths.

Alarmist/Warmists have failed to show evidence that CO2 is a driver of climate, which of course isn't surprising since it doesn't exist.

Unless you can provide a source for that it is nothing more than an appeal to ignorance.

Then you are way behind because it is well known, example about the per decade warming trend:

Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

"A - Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?"

An initial point to make is that in the responses to these questions I've assumed that when you talk about the global temperature record, you mean the record that combines the estimates from land regions with those from the marine regions of the world. CRU produces the land component, with the Met Office Hadley Centre producing the marine component.

Temperature data for the period 1860-1880 are more uncertain, because of sparser coverage, than for later periods in the 20th Century. The 1860-1880 period is also only 21 years in length. As for the two periods 1910-40 and 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically significantly different (see numbers below).

I have also included the trend over the period 1975 to 2009, which has a very similar trend to the period 1975-1998.

So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.

Here are the trends and significances for each period:

Fewer Tornadoes

Decreased ACE in recent decade

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Now hear this:

‘Sobering’ New UN Report Challenges Republican Climate Hawks’ Free-Market Dogma | HuffPost

I am 71 hears old and I actually fear reincarnation more than death and this is why. I do not want to come back into a world on fire, plagued by drought, extreme weather, and famine That is where we are headed. The pig headed and greedy conservatives had better wake up and realize that they can't kill the earth for short term profits which is exactly what this is all about.

Younger people had better wake the **** up and think about their future regardless of their spiritual beliefs

And please spare us the hysterical horsesit which I can already hear about the evil UN plotting to usurp our soverenty and establish a one world government . Get the **** over it.

LMFAO you posting about reincarnation as proof man made climate change is real ?



What a LGBT dofus..

No bubba. Do you have a reading problem.?? That is not what I said at all.

Do YOU have a thinking problem? the current warming trend very similar to PREVIOUS warming trends back to the mid 1800's. There are FEWER landfalling hurricanes and Tornadoes than usual in the last decade. Increasing cold/snow in recent decades, decreasing wildfire and flood deaths.

Alarmist/Warmists have failed to show evidence that CO2 is a driver of climate, which of course isn't surprising since it doesn't exist.

Unless you can provide a source for that it is nothing more than an appeal to ignorance.

Then you are way behind because it is well known, example about the per decade warming trend:

Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

"A - Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?"

An initial point to make is that in the responses to these questions I've assumed that when you talk about the global temperature record, you mean the record that combines the estimates from land regions with those from the marine regions of the world. CRU produces the land component, with the Met Office Hadley Centre producing the marine component.

Temperature data for the period 1860-1880 are more uncertain, because of sparser coverage, than for later periods in the 20th Century. The 1860-1880 period is also only 21 years in length. As for the two periods 1910-40 and 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically significantly different (see numbers below).

I have also included the trend over the period 1975 to 2009, which has a very similar trend to the period 1975-1998.

So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.

Here are the trends and significances for each period:

Fewer Tornadoes

Decreased ACE in recent decade

From the same interview...… You conveniently left out a few thing:

B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

C - Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?

No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant.

E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

And let me remind you that this is the guy who you climate change deniers tried and failed to discredit with leaked e mails

Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Fewer Tornadoes

Ah yes Roy Spencer, the guy who said that more Co2 in the environment is good, and we cant get rid of it anyway,

Climate misinformation by source: Roy Spencer

 

[Sunsettommy]

LMFAO you posting about reincarnation as proof man made climate change is real ?



What a LGBT dofus..

No bubba. Do you have a reading problem.?? That is not what I said at all.

Do YOU have a thinking problem? the current warming trend very similar to PREVIOUS warming trends back to the mid 1800's. There are FEWER landfalling hurricanes and Tornadoes than usual in the last decade. Increasing cold/snow in recent decades, decreasing wildfire and flood deaths.

Alarmist/Warmists have failed to show evidence that CO2 is a driver of climate, which of course isn't surprising since it doesn't exist.

Unless you can provide a source for that it is nothing more than an appeal to ignorance.

Then you are way behind because it is well known, example about the per decade warming trend:

Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

"A - Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?"

An initial point to make is that in the responses to these questions I've assumed that when you talk about the global temperature record, you mean the record that combines the estimates from land regions with those from the marine regions of the world. CRU produces the land component, with the Met Office Hadley Centre producing the marine component.

Temperature data for the period 1860-1880 are more uncertain, because of sparser coverage, than for later periods in the 20th Century. The 1860-1880 period is also only 21 years in length. As for the two periods 1910-40 and 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically significantly different (see numbers below).

I have also included the trend over the period 1975 to 2009, which has a very similar trend to the period 1975-1998.

So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.

Here are the trends and significances for each period:

Fewer Tornadoes

Decreased ACE in recent decade

From the same interview...… You conveniently left out a few thing:

B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

C - Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?

No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant.

E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

And let me remind you that this is the guy who you climate change deniers tried and failed to discredit with leaked e mails

Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia

Once again for YOU the dishonest person who completely ignored Dr. Jones answer to the question. The rate of warming is still around the .16C /decade today.

It is clear you are just the latest warmist moron who can't articulate a decent counterpoint, see that you try that stupid deflection to other parts of the interview that doesn't change his first answer at all, which stated the rate was about .16C/decade in all the identifiable warming period back to the 1800's.

You stupidity is vivid here since you quoted:

B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods"

clue time for warmist moron:

.12C is SMALLER than .16C

Your other quote:

"C - Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?

No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant."

-.12C is a LOT lower than either .12C (1995-2009) or .16C (1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998)

Your stupidity is noted.​

 

[Sunsettommy]

Fewer Tornadoes

Ah yes Roy Spencer, the guy who said that more Co2 in the environment is good, and we cant get rid of it anyway,

Climate misinformation by source: Roy Spencer

All this warmist loon can come up with is an ad hom by proxy, no actual reply to the evidence that was 100% from the NOAA. The NOAA themselves show a DECLINE in severe Tornadoes over the past few decades. Dr. Spencer was simply bringing it up on his blog.

Again you have NOTHING to show here but more dead on arrival replies.

 

[SSDD]

Now ………...



View attachment 222436

Got any evidence to support your faith?

 

[SSDD]

For some reason.....Scientists from around the world concur on manmade climate change

Only Republicans and Oil Companies disagree

Interesting...can you provide a single piece of observed evidence which supports this belief in man made climate change over natural variability. I mean, if all the scientists everywhere believe it, surely there must be a literal mountain of observed evidence which served to convince them....I am just asking for a single piece of it....and yet, you won't be able to deliver because no such evidence exists.

You know what will bring a bunch of scientists who are supposed to be natural born skeptics together faster than even a mountain of evidence?...a wheelbarrow full of money. Since you can't provide even a single piece of observed, measured evidence supporting the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability, I'll give you three guesses as to exactly what brought them into consensus...

 

[SSDD]

For some reason.....Scientists from around the world concur on manmade climate change

Only Republicans and Oil Companies disagree

Actually oil companies like Exxon and BP agree that global warming is real and the result of the burning of fossil fuels.

Actually, they stand to make a killing off of the global warming scam...follow the money..it never leads to observed measured evidence to support the hypothesis.

 

[BlackFlag]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

^ such profound ignorace. Incredible

 

[SSDD]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

^ such profound ignorace. Incredible

So let me guess...you believe that there is plenty of observed, measured evidence that supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability.

 

[Sunsettommy]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

^ such profound ignorace. Incredible

So let me guess...you believe that there is plenty of observed, measured evidence that supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability.

Notice that Indiana Fun, Crepitus, ProgressivePatriot and Blackflag avoid honest debate?