Gore: "Deniers are like racists!!

[sealybobo]

That is opinion. It is devoid of science. Look at the language they use. They don't say "this did that, or health improved because of this" they say "likely ". That is a weasle word. When they use language like that they are not being scientific.

Look up the scientific method and get back to us when you understand what it means.

The climate science community says you're full of crap. Just repeating what the oil company lobbyist/scientists tell you.

 

[Cellblock2429]

What? We want them to eventually go along too.

They do affect the environment.

Just like Al Gore couldn't fix GW alone by selling 4 of his 5 homes and not flying on private jets, the USA can't do this alone.

The Paris Agreement | United Nations

www.un.org

Trump's withdrawal increased the carbon price for other countries while reducing its own carbon price. When the withdrawal took effect, the U.S. was the only UNFCCC member states who was not a signatory to the Paris Agreement.

The Russian Federation participates in the implementation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (hereinafter - the Convention), the Kyoto Protocol of December 11, 1997 and the Paris Agreement of December 12, 2015.

As of February 2023, 194 states and the EU, representing over 98% of global greenhouse gas emissions, have ratified or acceded to the Agreement, including China and the United States, the countries with the 1st and 2nd largest CO2 emissions among UNFCCC members.

/——/ Greta says we’re all gonna die, so why bother?

 

[Cellblock2429]

The climate science community says you're full of crap. Just repeating what the oil company lobbyist/scientists tell you.

/——-/ And 500 say it’s all Bullshyt. There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations
Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

1 Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.
2. Warming is far slower than predicted.
3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models.
4. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters.
6. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.
7. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic.

 

[jc456]

You are the Republican base. Trump supporters. Idiots. Fox News called you the cousin F'ing types. Hillary called you Deplorables. I call you idiots.

what is it about the truth that scares you more than lying?

 

[jc456]

/——-/ And 500 say it’s all Bullshyt. There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations
Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

30,000 say it ain't so.

30,000 Scientists Sign Petition on Global Warming - The Heartland Institute

The claim that the debate about the severity and cause of global warming is "settled science" has taken a beating with the release of the names of 31,072 American scientists who reject the assertion that global warming has reached a crisis stage and is

heartland.org

And 75 out of 77 said something and that's a consensus story of .................................. well, bullshit.

 

[Cellblock2429]

30,000 say it ain't so.

30,000 Scientists Sign Petition on Global Warming - The Heartland Institute

The claim that the debate about the severity and cause of global warming is "settled science" has taken a beating with the release of the names of 31,072 American scientists who reject the assertion that global warming has reached a crisis stage and is

heartland.org

And 75 out of 77 said something and that's a consensus story of bullshit.

/——/ Quick, send AlBore more money. Now, refute the list I posted.

 

[westwall]

The climate science community says you're full of crap. Just repeating what the oil company lobbyist/scientists tell you.

The climate science "community" have turned into a pseudo science. Trenberth famously declared that his experiments don't need to be repeatable.

That is a refutation of the scientific method at its core, and renders him nothing more than a fraud.

As is the majority of the climate "science" community.

 

[mamooth]

What we see from this thread is how, since 2011, deniers haven't been able to come up with any new propaganda.

It's a dead cult. The kewler fascists have moved on to other forms of bad propaganda, like antivaxxism or election denial. Denialism is kind of an old-fogey thing now.

 

[sealybobo]

Oh, look. Yet another opinion piece devoid of science.

The sources where you get your science are where again? Who? Right wing nut job lobbyists paid for by Shell Oil?

Links to your science please. And I assume the scientific community has reached consensus on your sources findings? No?

That doesn't mean climate scientists are frauds. It means your sources are frauds.

Why do you have 5 scientists who agree with you for every 100? Could those be con scientists who are as brainwashed as you? Or more likely they are like Fox News. They know they're lying. We know they are lying. But just as long as the Republican base doesn't know

Slowly your arguments will shift as it becomes harder and harder to deny man made climate change.

Obama told you the fish would swim in Miami. They did. And last week they made it up to Fort Lauderdale

/——-/ And 500 say it’s all Bullshyt. There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations
Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

OMG. All I had to do was a little looking to find that these are PETROLEUM scientists. Don't you see? They want to sell us on continuing to use their product.

American Association of Petroleum Geologists​

The AAPG works to "advance the science of geology, especially as it relates to petroleum, natural gas, other subsurface fluids, and mineral resources; to promote the technology of exploring for, finding, and producing these materials in an economically and environmentally sound manner; and to advance the professional well-being of its members."[1] The AAPG was founded in 1917 and is headquartered in Tulsa, Oklahoma; currently almost one-third of its members live outside the United States.

Petroleum!!!!

In 2006, the AAPG was criticized for selecting author Michael Crichton for their Journalism Award for Jurassic Park and "for his recent science-based thriller State of Fear", in which Crichton exposed his rejection of scientific evidence for anthropogenic global warming. Daniel P. Schrag, a geochemist who directs the Harvard University Center for the Environment, called the award "a total embarrassment" that he said "reflects the politics of the oil industry and a lack of professionalism" on the association's part. The AAPG's award for journalism lauded "notable journalistic achievement, in any medium, which contributes to public understanding of geology, energy resources or the technology of oil and gas exploration." The name of the journalism award has since been changed to the "Geosciences in the Media" Award.

The criticism drew attention to the AAPG's 1999 position statement formally rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate. The Council of the American Quaternary Association wrote in a criticism of the award that the "AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

I'll repeat a few times so it sinks in

"AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

"AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

"AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

 

[sealybobo]

The climate science "community" have turned into a pseudo science. Trenberth famously declared that his experiments don't need to be repeatable.

That is a refutation of the scientific method at its core, and renders him nothing more than a fraud.

As is the majority of the climate "science" community.

Nope. You're basically swallowing Petroleum jizz my friend.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The sources where you get your science are where again? Who? Right wing nut job lobbyists paid for by Shell Oil?

Links to your science please. And I assume the scientific community has reached consensus on your sources findings? No?

That doesn't mean climate scientists are frauds. It means your sources are frauds.

Why do you have 5 scientists who agree with you for every 100? Could those be con scientists who are as brainwashed as you? Or more likely they are like Fox News. They know they're lying. We know they are lying. But just as long as the Republican base doesn't know

Slowly your arguments will shift as it becomes harder and harder to deny man made climate change.

Obama told you the fish would swim in Miami. They did. And last week they made it up to Fort Lauderdale

OMG. All I had to do was a little looking to find that these are PETROLEUM scientists. Don't you see? They want to sell us on continuing to use their product.

American Association of Petroleum Geologists​

The AAPG works to "advance the science of geology, especially as it relates to petroleum, natural gas, other subsurface fluids, and mineral resources; to promote the technology of exploring for, finding, and producing these materials in an economically and environmentally sound manner; and to advance the professional well-being of its members."[1] The AAPG was founded in 1917 and is headquartered in Tulsa, Oklahoma; currently almost one-third of its members live outside the United States.

Petroleum!!!!

In 2006, the AAPG was criticized for selecting author Michael Crichton for their Journalism Award for Jurassic Park and "for his recent science-based thriller State of Fear", in which Crichton exposed his rejection of scientific evidence for anthropogenic global warming. Daniel P. Schrag, a geochemist who directs the Harvard University Center for the Environment, called the award "a total embarrassment" that he said "reflects the politics of the oil industry and a lack of professionalism" on the association's part. The AAPG's award for journalism lauded "notable journalistic achievement, in any medium, which contributes to public understanding of geology, energy resources or the technology of oil and gas exploration." The name of the journalism award has since been changed to the "Geosciences in the Media" Award.

The criticism drew attention to the AAPG's 1999 position statement formally rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate. The Council of the American Quaternary Association wrote in a criticism of the award that the "AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

I'll repeat a few times so it sinks in

"AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

"AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

"AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."

/——-/

 

[jc456]

What we see from this thread is how, since 2011, deniers haven't been able to come up with any new propaganda.

It's a dead cult. The kewler fascists have moved on to other forms of bad propaganda, like antivaxxism or election denial. Denialism is kind of an old-fogey thing now.

Still zero predictions true since 2011 when the thread began. And you have the audacity to say something to us. ahhaahhahahahahaaha the ultimate loser position is yours.

 

[jc456]

Nope. You're basically swallowing Petroleum jizz my friend.

name a predictions that came true since 2011. I'll wait. ultimate loser is you.

 

[jc456]

The sources where you get your science are where again? Who? Right wing nut job lobbyists paid for by Shell Oil?

who pays for your science? I doubt you'll answer.

 

[jc456]

Why do you have 5 scientists who agree with you for every 100?

post the first 100 so we can have a laugh. I bet we'll laugh cause you don't have a one.

I have 30,000 in one story above.

 

[sealybobo]

post the first 100 so we can have a laugh. I bet we'll laugh cause you don't have a one.

I have 30,000 in one story above.

All three posts, bad arguments, I'm not going to explain it again or go chasing facts I will post for you and you will reject.

You're creepy stupid bro.

 

[sealybobo]

who pays for your science? I doubt you'll answer.

Tax payers.

 

[jc456]

All three posts, bad arguments, I'm not going to explain it again or go chasing facts I will post for you and you will reject.

You're creepy stupid bro.

0 for one on a scientist.

 

[jc456]

Tax payers.

so they are paid with my money. even more prepostorous

 

[sealybobo]

so they are paid with my money. even more prepostorous

Yea so was the internet. Are you complaining about that?