How you can tell "Global Warming" (aka: Climate Change, Climate Disruption) is a scam

[westwall]

^ that OP CrusaderFrank . All the science is there. Whats the matter? Nothing there to bear bait the denier base with? Too bad, so sad.

Reminds me of Virginia's former Atty Gen'l trying to do the same thing. Predictably, the Courts did not decide in his favor

That inquiry was a follow-up to ClimateGate emails which were extremely enlightening as to the behind the scenes horseshit of blocking certain authors from publication, justifying misleading data preparation techniques and the like. And Mann was at the center of all that. This IS the same kind of inquiry. The STATES do not have the level of FOIA and document archiving that the Fed agencies do. And CONGRESS is entitled to make that inquiry..

Thanks for proving my proving my point. You people going after people in lieu of disproving the data.

You have that backasswards bub. Why am I not surprised. We have already shown you that the data presented by your hero's is crap. The pause is admitted to by the IPCC, the so called heat records are smaller than the instruments have the ability to measure. The CO2 is concentrated in the southern hemisphere, not the northern as your crap computer models show, etc. etc. etc. We have demonstrated repeatedly that the claims of your masters is either unfounded or absolutely false.

So, you all resort to Appeals to Authority, personal attacks, and outright lying.

 

[BULLDOG]

Sure. The right sees what they want to see. Man made global climate change is fake, another 50 votes will end healthcare, and gay marriage can be stopped. You're batting 1000.

Straw dog.. Tell me how hot it's GONNA be in 2050 -- and I'll play your game.

Why do you think I should know that? I already told you I'm not a climate scientist, and I doubt they would be able to be that specific..

You said the science was settled and there was a consensus.. Well -- what IS the "consensus" on the temperature anomaly in 2050.. And what WAS IT -- when this circus hit the road in 1980?

Simple questions.. Probably a 5th grader could find those answers..

Who has an interest in pushing a false theory? Of course it's easy to see why oil companies would be interested in burying such a theory.

Every Climate scientist who gets money from the government, every bureaucrat and government employee and anyone sucking on the government tit has a financial interest in promoting the AGW scam.

OK.Why is the government doing that. What is the purpose?

 

[westwall]

Straw dog.. Tell me how hot it's GONNA be in 2050 -- and I'll play your game.

Why do you think I should know that? I already told you I'm not a climate scientist, and I doubt they would be able to be that specific..

You said the science was settled and there was a consensus.. Well -- what IS the "consensus" on the temperature anomaly in 2050.. And what WAS IT -- when this circus hit the road in 1980?

Simple questions.. Probably a 5th grader could find those answers..

Who has an interest in pushing a false theory? Of course it's easy to see why oil companies would be interested in burying such a theory.

Every Climate scientist who gets money from the government, every bureaucrat and government employee and anyone sucking on the government tit has a financial interest in promoting the AGW scam.

OK.Why is the government doing that. What is the purpose?

Centralize, entrench, and grow government power. The legislature then passes laws that enrich the senators and congressmen who have shares in the companies that benefit from the laws that were just passed. I am sure you remember Solyndra? Care to guess which politicians benefited from that fiasco? The small time investors didn't get a dime, but the wealthy politicians who had invested in the company made out quite well. Even though the company never turned a profit THEY made money. Now, multiply that by every wind, solar and "sustainability" company.

That's why.

 

[flacaltenn]

^ that OP CrusaderFrank . All the science is there. Whats the matter? Nothing there to bear bait the denier base with? Too bad, so sad.

Reminds me of Virginia's former Atty Gen'l trying to do the same thing. Predictably, the Courts did not decide in his favor

That inquiry was a follow-up to ClimateGate emails which were extremely enlightening as to the behind the scenes horseshit of blocking certain authors from publication, justifying misleading data preparation techniques and the like. And Mann was at the center of all that. This IS the same kind of inquiry. The STATES do not have the level of FOIA and document archiving that the Fed agencies do. And CONGRESS is entitled to make that inquiry..

Thanks for proving my proving my point. You people going after people in lieu of disproving the data.

Not "going after them".. Just want a transparency on the collaborations and structural notes for the work. Scientists and engineers document the process of investigating all the time. And decisions they made in the scope of work are important to determining WHAT they considered and WHY they rejected alternate methods. ALL THOSE THINGS are probably not in the final work. And since they represent the Federal Govt and not an independent academic institution, Congress has a right to ask for communications that detail some of those choices in their approach.

 

[flacaltenn]

It's all for nothing anyway.. Because if the satellites don't confirm the work, and NOAA is suddenly at odds with the Hadley-CRU or BEST folks --- SOMEBODY's got a lot of 'splaining to do Lucy..

 

[mamooth]

So when we point out the discussion should be about science instead of going on witch hunts, the deniers respond with escalating paranoia and increasing separation from reality.

Don't worry, it doesn't remind anyone of a cult in its death throes. Really it doesn't. Nobody will associate it with, say, Jonestown, or maybe the Führer's bunker.

 

[BULLDOG]

Why do you think I should know that? I already told you I'm not a climate scientist, and I doubt they would be able to be that specific..

You said the science was settled and there was a consensus.. Well -- what IS the "consensus" on the temperature anomaly in 2050.. And what WAS IT -- when this circus hit the road in 1980?

Simple questions.. Probably a 5th grader could find those answers..

Who has an interest in pushing a false theory? Of course it's easy to see why oil companies would be interested in burying such a theory.

Every Climate scientist who gets money from the government, every bureaucrat and government employee and anyone sucking on the government tit has a financial interest in promoting the AGW scam.

OK.Why is the government doing that. What is the purpose?

Centralize, entrench, and grow government power. The legislature then passes laws that enrich the senators and congressmen who have shares in the companies that benefit from the laws that were just passed. I am sure you remember Solyndra? Care to guess which politicians benefited from that fiasco? The small time investors didn't get a dime, but the wealthy politicians who had invested in the company made out quite well. Even though the company never turned a profit THEY made money. Now, multiply that by every wind, solar and "sustainability" company.

That's why.

I started gathering information to show just how ridiculous your claims are, but your conspiracy theory is just too dumb to go to that much trouble.
Solyndra did go bust, but considering the number of startups that fail, it's not really surprising. The number of jobs that have been created through that program, well outweighs any loss by one company. Of course that didn't stop the right from trying to manufacture that into a scandal too.
You have nothing but more right wing whining and fewer people are willing to listen to that crap.

 

[mamooth]

Stalinism is demanding that no discussion take place because the "science is settled", asshat.

And the only people doing that are the Stalinists on your side who are trying to get scientists thrown in jail for disagreeing with TheParty.

It is you asshats who are suing people who don't agree with your fraudulent studies

Nobody was sued for merely disagreeing with anything. People were sued for loudly, publicly and repeatedly calling scientists deliberate frauds and criminals, comparing them to child molesters, and refusing to retract such statements or justify them.

So, I take it you're endorsing such tactics, and think they should be used everywhere?

and not once have any sceptics initiated a lawsuit. That is ALL you!

The Stalinist is YOU bucko!

You seem to be confused about the English language. The actual skeptics are all on the pro-AGW side. After all, one has to understand logic and the scientific method to be a skeptic, and if someone does understand such things, they don't get sucked into the denier cult.

In any case, it's quite a ringing endorsement of how ethical the rational people are, being that the depraved scumbags on the denier side can't even come up with some fake reasons to file any lawsuits. That's why they have to resort to getting Stalinist party officials to do their dirty work.

 

[westwall]

You said the science was settled and there was a consensus.. Well -- what IS the "consensus" on the temperature anomaly in 2050.. And what WAS IT -- when this circus hit the road in 1980?

Simple questions.. Probably a 5th grader could find those answers..

Who has an interest in pushing a false theory? Of course it's easy to see why oil companies would be interested in burying such a theory.

Every Climate scientist who gets money from the government, every bureaucrat and government employee and anyone sucking on the government tit has a financial interest in promoting the AGW scam.

OK.Why is the government doing that. What is the purpose?

Centralize, entrench, and grow government power. The legislature then passes laws that enrich the senators and congressmen who have shares in the companies that benefit from the laws that were just passed. I am sure you remember Solyndra? Care to guess which politicians benefited from that fiasco? The small time investors didn't get a dime, but the wealthy politicians who had invested in the company made out quite well. Even though the company never turned a profit THEY made money. Now, multiply that by every wind, solar and "sustainability" company.

That's why.

I started gathering information to show just how ridiculous your claims are, but your conspiracy theory is just too dumb to go to that much trouble.
Solyndra did go bust, but considering the number of startups that fail, it's not really surprising. The number of jobs that have been created through that program, well outweighs any loss by one company. Of course that didn't stop the right from trying to manufacture that into a scandal too.
You have nothing but more right wing whining and fewer people are willing to listen to that crap.

Talk about sticking your head in the sand....

Here you go lazy boy. Took me all of two seconds to find 123 pages of responses. Here's just one...

"On SolarReserve's website is a list of "investment partners," including the "PCG Clean Energy & Technology Fund (East) LLC." As blogger American Glob quickly discovered, PCG's number two is none other than "Ronald Pelosi, a San Francisco political insider and financial industry polymath who happens to be the brother-in-law of Nancy Pelosi, the Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives."


"Steve Mitchell and Argonaut Private Equity might have a chance to recoup some of their losses in the Solyndra debacle now that the Department of Energy has given a $737 million dollar loan guarantee to a company backed by Argonaut that also lists Mitchell among its board of directors.

Mitchell served on the Solyndra LLC Board of Directors. He also serves as Managing Director for Argonaut Private Equity, a company that invested in Solyndra through the LLCs parent company. After Solyndra declared bankruptcy, two Democratic members of the U.S. House asked that Mitchell testify about Solyndra. Though he has not appeared before Congress, he has "been asked to provide documents to Congress" pertaining to Solyndra."


Carnahan, a member of the prominent Missouri Democratic family, has been tapped by the Obama campaign as its chief Missouri fundraiser. He is chairman of the board of Wind Capital Group, a wind energy company that makes it corporate headquarters in St. Louis. He formerly was president and CEO of the company.

Last year, Wind Capital's Lost Creek Farm facility in northwest Missouri received a $107 million tax credit from the Treasury Department, among many such wind operations receiving support from from stimulus funds.

Crony Capitalism: $737 Million Green Jobs Loan Given to Nancy Pelosi's Brother-In-Law



As usual, you progressive loons hurl insults but the facts are there for everyone to see. You're just too fucking stupid, lazy, or personally invested to bother to look. Either way every time you make a statement like that...and we destroy it, as we always do, you just reinforce our position and make yourselves look really, really, dumb.

THANKS!

 

[westwall]

Stalinism is demanding that no discussion take place because the "science is settled", asshat.

And the only people doing that are the Stalinists on your side who are trying to get scientists thrown in jail for disagreeing with TheParty.

It is you asshats who are suing people who don't agree with your fraudulent studies

Nobody was sued for merely disagreeing with anything. People were sued for loudly, publicly and repeatedly calling scientists deliberate frauds and criminals, comparing them to child molesters, and refusing to retract such statements or justify them.

So, I take it you're endorsing such tactics, and think they should be used everywhere?

and not once have any sceptics initiated a lawsuit. That is ALL you!

The Stalinist is YOU bucko!

You seem to be confused about the English language. The actual skeptics are all on the pro-AGW side. After all, one has to understand logic and the scientific method to be a skeptic, and if someone does understand such things, they don't get sucked into the denier cult.

In any case, it's quite a ringing endorsement of how ethical the rational people are, being that the depraved scumbags on the denier side can't even come up with some fake reasons to file any lawsuits. That's why they have to resort to getting Stalinist party officials to do their dirty work.

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions. Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

 

[BULLDOG]

Who has an interest in pushing a false theory? Of course it's easy to see why oil companies would be interested in burying such a theory.

Every Climate scientist who gets money from the government, every bureaucrat and government employee and anyone sucking on the government tit has a financial interest in promoting the AGW scam.

OK.Why is the government doing that. What is the purpose?

Centralize, entrench, and grow government power. The legislature then passes laws that enrich the senators and congressmen who have shares in the companies that benefit from the laws that were just passed. I am sure you remember Solyndra? Care to guess which politicians benefited from that fiasco? The small time investors didn't get a dime, but the wealthy politicians who had invested in the company made out quite well. Even though the company never turned a profit THEY made money. Now, multiply that by every wind, solar and "sustainability" company.

That's why.

I started gathering information to show just how ridiculous your claims are, but your conspiracy theory is just too dumb to go to that much trouble.
Solyndra did go bust, but considering the number of startups that fail, it's not really surprising. The number of jobs that have been created through that program, well outweighs any loss by one company. Of course that didn't stop the right from trying to manufacture that into a scandal too.
You have nothing but more right wing whining and fewer people are willing to listen to that crap.

Talk about sticking your head in the sand....

Here you go lazy boy. Took me all of two seconds to find 123 pages of responses. Here's just one...

"On SolarReserve's website is a list of "investment partners," including the "PCG Clean Energy & Technology Fund (East) LLC." As blogger American Glob quickly discovered, PCG's number two is none other than "Ronald Pelosi, a San Francisco political insider and financial industry polymath who happens to be the brother-in-law of Nancy Pelosi, the Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives."


"Steve Mitchell and Argonaut Private Equity might have a chance to recoup some of their losses in the Solyndra debacle now that the Department of Energy has given a $737 million dollar loan guarantee to a company backed by Argonaut that also lists Mitchell among its board of directors.

Mitchell served on the Solyndra LLC Board of Directors. He also serves as Managing Director for Argonaut Private Equity, a company that invested in Solyndra through the LLCs parent company. After Solyndra declared bankruptcy, two Democratic members of the U.S. House asked that Mitchell testify about Solyndra. Though he has not appeared before Congress, he has "been asked to provide documents to Congress" pertaining to Solyndra."


Carnahan, a member of the prominent Missouri Democratic family, has been tapped by the Obama campaign as its chief Missouri fundraiser. He is chairman of the board of Wind Capital Group, a wind energy company that makes it corporate headquarters in St. Louis. He formerly was president and CEO of the company.

Last year, Wind Capital's Lost Creek Farm facility in northwest Missouri received a $107 million tax credit from the Treasury Department, among many such wind operations receiving support from from stimulus funds.

Crony Capitalism: $737 Million Green Jobs Loan Given to Nancy Pelosi's Brother-In-Law



As usual, you progressive loons hurl insults but the facts are there for everyone to see. You're just too fucking stupid, lazy, or personally invested to bother to look. Either way every time you make a statement like that...and we destroy it, as we always do, you just reinforce our position and make yourselves look really, really, dumb.

THANKS!

You've destroyed nothing.You have to be fully invested in all the right wing conspiracy theories first for any of that to make any sense at all.

 

[westwall]

Every Climate scientist who gets money from the government, every bureaucrat and government employee and anyone sucking on the government tit has a financial interest in promoting the AGW scam.

OK.Why is the government doing that. What is the purpose?

Centralize, entrench, and grow government power. The legislature then passes laws that enrich the senators and congressmen who have shares in the companies that benefit from the laws that were just passed. I am sure you remember Solyndra? Care to guess which politicians benefited from that fiasco? The small time investors didn't get a dime, but the wealthy politicians who had invested in the company made out quite well. Even though the company never turned a profit THEY made money. Now, multiply that by every wind, solar and "sustainability" company.

That's why.

I started gathering information to show just how ridiculous your claims are, but your conspiracy theory is just too dumb to go to that much trouble.
Solyndra did go bust, but considering the number of startups that fail, it's not really surprising. The number of jobs that have been created through that program, well outweighs any loss by one company. Of course that didn't stop the right from trying to manufacture that into a scandal too.
You have nothing but more right wing whining and fewer people are willing to listen to that crap.

Talk about sticking your head in the sand....

Here you go lazy boy. Took me all of two seconds to find 123 pages of responses. Here's just one...

"On SolarReserve's website is a list of "investment partners," including the "PCG Clean Energy & Technology Fund (East) LLC." As blogger American Glob quickly discovered, PCG's number two is none other than "Ronald Pelosi, a San Francisco political insider and financial industry polymath who happens to be the brother-in-law of Nancy Pelosi, the Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives."


"Steve Mitchell and Argonaut Private Equity might have a chance to recoup some of their losses in the Solyndra debacle now that the Department of Energy has given a $737 million dollar loan guarantee to a company backed by Argonaut that also lists Mitchell among its board of directors.

Mitchell served on the Solyndra LLC Board of Directors. He also serves as Managing Director for Argonaut Private Equity, a company that invested in Solyndra through the LLCs parent company. After Solyndra declared bankruptcy, two Democratic members of the U.S. House asked that Mitchell testify about Solyndra. Though he has not appeared before Congress, he has "been asked to provide documents to Congress" pertaining to Solyndra."


Carnahan, a member of the prominent Missouri Democratic family, has been tapped by the Obama campaign as its chief Missouri fundraiser. He is chairman of the board of Wind Capital Group, a wind energy company that makes it corporate headquarters in St. Louis. He formerly was president and CEO of the company.

Last year, Wind Capital's Lost Creek Farm facility in northwest Missouri received a $107 million tax credit from the Treasury Department, among many such wind operations receiving support from from stimulus funds.

Crony Capitalism: $737 Million Green Jobs Loan Given to Nancy Pelosi's Brother-In-Law



As usual, you progressive loons hurl insults but the facts are there for everyone to see. You're just too fucking stupid, lazy, or personally invested to bother to look. Either way every time you make a statement like that...and we destroy it, as we always do, you just reinforce our position and make yourselves look really, really, dumb.

THANKS!

You've destroyed nothing.You have to be fully invested in all the right wing conspiracy theories first for any of that to make any sense at all.

Typical bullcrap non sequitur attack while blissfully ignoring the actual facts that were presented. No sweat, I now know that you are intellectually dishonest so any further interaction with you is a waste of time.

Thanks for showing us your stripes!

 

[mamooth]

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions.

One of my points is how denier delusion and paranoia levels are clearly on the rise, so I thank you for supporting that point.

Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

Given I've never supported any such thing, what did you hope to accomplish with such a strange statement?

I've asked many times if any denier here will denounce their party's attempts to imprison scientists, and none will. If they answer at all, they tell a tale about how those scientists are criminal EnemiesOfTheState who deserve imprisonment, the same excuse the Stalinists used to justify their behavior. The deniers are either too frightened to risk contradicting their party's official dogma (as doing that might get them purged themselves), or they're actually enthusiastic supporters of the Stalinism.

If that question is asked of us here in the reason-based community, it makes little sense, since nobody of any significance has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned for disagreeing with the science. Deniers have to stretch ridiculously to find anybody making such a statement, usually finding some college professor that nobody ever heard of. And unlike the deniers, we skeptics have no qualms about condemning those people.

 

[Dot Com]

Remember when Congress wanted the discussion between Dick Cheney and oil company executives that led to the Bush Administration energy policy? YOUR president explained that it was required that those sorts of internal discussions had a required presumption of privacy.

You have no reason to believe that anyone is hiding anything. You DO have reason to believe that Smith's demands are unreasonable on several levels and, if he has a problem with Karl's paper, he needs to try to take on Karl's paper. Doing what he's doing simply tells all of us that he cannot. Asshole.

Its diffent now!!! IT JUST IS!!!

^ that OP CrusaderFrank . All the science is there. Whats the matter? Nothing there to bear bait the denier base with? Too bad, so sad.

Reminds me of Virginia's former Atty Gen'l trying to do the same thing. Predictably, the Courts did not decide in his favor

That inquiry was a follow-up to ClimateGate emails which were extremely enlightening as to the behind the scenes horseshit of blocking certain authors from publication, justifying misleading data preparation techniques and the like. And Mann was at the center of all that. This IS the same kind of inquiry. The STATES do not have the level of FOIA and document archiving that the Fed agencies do. And CONGRESS is entitled to make that inquiry..

Thanks for proving my proving my point. You people going after people in lieu of disproving the data.

You have that backasswards bub. Why am I not surprised. We have already shown you that the data presented by your hero's is crap. The pause is admitted to by the IPCC, the so called heat records are smaller than the instruments have the ability to measure. The CO2 is concentrated in the southern hemisphere, not the northern as your crap computer models show, etc. etc. etc. We have demonstrated repeatedly that the claims of your masters is either unfounded or absolutely false.

So, you all resort to Appeals to Authority, personal attacks, and outright lying.

in this thread? You people specifically debunk the report using sources? Where? And don't come back w/ the weak "you find it" like you did the other day. You have been around here long enough to know that if you make an assertion, the onus is on YOU to prove it w/ sources/links.

I will quote this again:

Agency won’t give GOP internal docs on climate research

NOAA spokeswoman Ciaran Clayton said the internal communications are confidential and not related to what Smith is trying to find out.

“We have provided data, all of which is publicly available online, supporting scientific research, and multiple in-person briefings,” she said.

Specifically refute the data from the report.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

 

[Dot Com]

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions.

One of my points is how denier delusion and paranoia levels are clearly on the rise, so I thank you for supporting that point.

Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

Given I've never supported any such thing, what did you hope to accomplish with such a strange statement?

I've asked many times if any denier here will denounce their party's attempts to imprison scientists, and none will. If they answer at all, they tell a tale about how those scientists are criminal EnemiesOfTheState who deserve imprisonment, the same excuse the Stalinists used to justify their behavior. The deniers are either too frightened to risk contradicting their party's official dogma (as doing that might get them purged themselves), or they're actually enthusiastic supporters of the Stalinism.

If that question is asked of us here in the reason-based community, it makes little sense, since nobody of any significance has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned for disagreeing with the science. Deniers have to stretch ridiculously to find anybody making such a statement, usually finding some college professor that nobody ever heard of. And unlike the deniers, we skeptics have no qualms about condemning those people.

They would have egged on the church against Galileo. Thats for sure. They are the contemporary analogue "Nothing to see here, move along" crowd.

 

[westwall]

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions.

One of my points is how denier delusion and paranoia levels are clearly on the rise, so I thank you for supporting that point.

Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

Given I've never supported any such thing, what did you hope to accomplish with such a strange statement?

I've asked many times if any denier here will denounce their party's attempts to imprison scientists, and none will. If they answer at all, they tell a tale about how those scientists are criminal EnemiesOfTheState who deserve imprisonment, the same excuse the Stalinists used to justify their behavior. The deniers are either too frightened to risk contradicting their party's official dogma (as doing that might get them purged themselves), or they're actually enthusiastic supporters of the Stalinism.

If that question is asked of us here in the reason-based community, it makes little sense, since nobody of any significance has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned for disagreeing with the science. Deniers have to stretch ridiculously to find anybody making such a statement, usually finding some college professor that nobody ever heard of. And unlike the deniers, we skeptics have no qualms about condemning those people.

They would have egged on the church against Galileo. Thats for sure. They are the contemporary analogue "Nothing to see here, move along" crowd.

Really? We're not the ones claiming the "science is settled" are we? Nope. YOU are the Church today silly boy. "The scripture is settled"....sound familiar?

 

[Dot Com]

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions.

One of my points is how denier delusion and paranoia levels are clearly on the rise, so I thank you for supporting that point.

Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

Given I've never supported any such thing, what did you hope to accomplish with such a strange statement?

I've asked many times if any denier here will denounce their party's attempts to imprison scientists, and none will. If they answer at all, they tell a tale about how those scientists are criminal EnemiesOfTheState who deserve imprisonment, the same excuse the Stalinists used to justify their behavior. The deniers are either too frightened to risk contradicting their party's official dogma (as doing that might get them purged themselves), or they're actually enthusiastic supporters of the Stalinism.

If that question is asked of us here in the reason-based community, it makes little sense, since nobody of any significance has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned for disagreeing with the science. Deniers have to stretch ridiculously to find anybody making such a statement, usually finding some college professor that nobody ever heard of. And unlike the deniers, we skeptics have no qualms about condemning those people.

They would have egged on the church against Galileo. Thats for sure. They are the contemporary analogue "Nothing to see here, move along" crowd.

Really? We're not the ones claiming the "science is settled" are we? Nope. YOU are the Church today silly boy. "The scripture is settled"....sound familiar?

What is this "silly boy" nonsense? Deniers are on the side of the status quo AKA oil companies & extraction interests much like the catholic church was the reigning flat earth society during Galileo's day..

 

[westwall]

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions.

One of my points is how denier delusion and paranoia levels are clearly on the rise, so I thank you for supporting that point.

Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

Given I've never supported any such thing, what did you hope to accomplish with such a strange statement?

I've asked many times if any denier here will denounce their party's attempts to imprison scientists, and none will. If they answer at all, they tell a tale about how those scientists are criminal EnemiesOfTheState who deserve imprisonment, the same excuse the Stalinists used to justify their behavior. The deniers are either too frightened to risk contradicting their party's official dogma (as doing that might get them purged themselves), or they're actually enthusiastic supporters of the Stalinism.

If that question is asked of us here in the reason-based community, it makes little sense, since nobody of any significance has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned for disagreeing with the science. Deniers have to stretch ridiculously to find anybody making such a statement, usually finding some college professor that nobody ever heard of. And unlike the deniers, we skeptics have no qualms about condemning those people.

They would have egged on the church against Galileo. Thats for sure. They are the contemporary analogue "Nothing to see here, move along" crowd.

Really? We're not the ones claiming the "science is settled" are we? Nope. YOU are the Church today silly boy. "The scripture is settled"....sound familiar?

What is this "silly boy" nonsense? Deniers are on the side of the status quo AKA oil companies & extraction interests much like the catholic church was the reigning flat earth society during Galileo's day..

The Catholic Church said Galileo was wrong because he was defying Church Doctrine. YOU claim that "deniers" are wrong because we challenge global warming scripture. Even a moron can see the similarity. Sooo, what ranks below moron? Sub moron.....

 

[jc456]

It's the other way round bucko. I dare you to look in the comments section of any global warming story on the net. Prior to CLIMATEGATE the sceptic vs true believer ratio was about 60/40 against global warming alarmism. Now it is over 90 percent against you. The only peole who push this crap are those who either make money directly off of it. The politicians who want to use it to concentrate their power or those who wish to benefit from the regulations to come from the legislation.

Your entire line of argument is one giant appeal to authority and that is the ultimate logic fail there is.

Sure. The right sees what they want to see. Man made global climate change is fake, another 50 votes will end healthcare, and gay marriage can be stopped. You're batting 1000.

Straw dog.. Tell me how hot it's GONNA be in 2050 -- and I'll play your game.

Why do you think I should know that? I already told you I'm not a climate scientist, and I doubt they would be able to be that specific..

You said the science was settled and there was a consensus.. Well -- what IS the "consensus" on the temperature anomaly in 2050.. And what WAS IT -- when this circus hit the road in 1980?

Simple questions.. Probably a 5th grader could find those answers..

Who has an interest in pushing a false theory? Of course it's easy to see why oil companies would be interested in burying such a theory.

why? No one has answered that question yet.

 

[Dot Com]

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions. Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

The only Stalinist's are you assholes who constantly scream for the sceptics to be killed, imprisoned, or forced into mental institutions.

One of my points is how denier delusion and paranoia levels are clearly on the rise, so I thank you for supporting that point.

Have fun looking in the mirror when you make those asinine accusations silly boy.

Given I've never supported any such thing, what did you hope to accomplish with such a strange statement?

I've asked many times if any denier here will denounce their party's attempts to imprison scientists, and none will. If they answer at all, they tell a tale about how those scientists are criminal EnemiesOfTheState who deserve imprisonment, the same excuse the Stalinists used to justify their behavior. The deniers are either too frightened to risk contradicting their party's official dogma (as doing that might get them purged themselves), or they're actually enthusiastic supporters of the Stalinism.

If that question is asked of us here in the reason-based community, it makes little sense, since nobody of any significance has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned for disagreeing with the science. Deniers have to stretch ridiculously to find anybody making such a statement, usually finding some college professor that nobody ever heard of. And unlike the deniers, we skeptics have no qualms about condemning those people.

They would have egged on the church against Galileo. Thats for sure. They are the contemporary analogue "Nothing to see here, move along" crowd.

Really? We're not the ones claiming the "science is settled" are we? Nope. YOU are the Church today silly boy. "The scripture is settled"....sound familiar?

What is this "silly boy" nonsense? Deniers are on the side of the status quo AKA oil companies & extraction interests much like the catholic church was the reigning flat earth society during Galileo's day..

The Catholic Church said Galileo was wrong because he was defying Church Doctrine. YOU claim that "deniers" are wrong because we challenge global warming scripture. Even a moron can see the similarity. Sooo, what ranks below moron? Sub moron.....

resorting to ad homs? Thanks for the admission of defeat.

You seriously get worked-up in these threads to the point of obsession. Just making an observation.