Introducing the Leo DiCaprio Act, the cost of being completely 180 degrees wrong, and cost America $$ in the process

[citygator]

Bullshit liar you are. The biggest credential is being the source/cause/author of what caused this...

Google Search

www.google.com

No, we want an old one showing lower water than today. You cannot show us one, because the oceans are NOT RISING, because there is NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT, because Planet Earth is NOT WARMING...

Let's see Lady Liberty. Is the ocean rising, Lady Liberty?

Answer NO

• 
  
• 
  

They’ve raised 8 inches since 1880 and tides change by 5 feet daily. The fact that this is your proof of no rising sea levels and global temperatures tells me what your credentials are:

Verified nut case.

HEY EVERYONE: This loon thinks the way you measure temperature and sea levels is random photos. He has a PHD from the University of 4Chan.

 

[EMH]

They’ve raised 8 inches since 1880

BULLSHIT FUDGE with no real data to back it up.

This loon thinks the way you measure temperature

LOL!!!

YOU are the one who REJECTED THE ACTUAL ATMOSPHERIC TEMP DATA, ALREADY DOCUMENTED ABOVE...

sea levels

are inversely correlated with the amount of ice on the planet. YOU cannot show us ONE SINGLE PHOTO of "ocean rise."

Why?

Because THERE IS NO OCEAN RISE, because THERE IS NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT.

WE went to court on this. 90% of Earth ice is on Antarctica...

Court Identifies Eleven Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’

Here's something American media are virtually guaranteed to not report: a British court has determined that Al Gore's schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" contains at least eleven material falsehoods. It seems a safe bet Matt Lauer and Diane Sawyer won't be discussing this Tuesday morning...

www.newsbusters.org

• The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO OCEAN RISE....

 

[jknowgood]

What are your credentials so that I can weigh your anonymous internet post with 90% of scientists? Just a couple of bullet points please to give me the gist.

Considering we haven't beat high temperatures from the 1800's. Shows your full of crap. Also look at a picture of the statue of Liberty from a hundred years ago and now. Water level is the same. Again you're full of crap.

 

[jknowgood]

They’ve raised 8 inches since 1880 and tides change by 5 feet daily. The fact that this is your proof of no rising sea levels and global temperatures tells me what your credentials are:

Verified nut case.

HEY EVERYONE: This loon thinks the way you measure temperature and sea levels is random photos. He has a PHD from the University of 4Chan.

I think it's called erosion.

 

[citygator]

I think it's called erosion.

Another scientist? What is your credentials?

 

[jknowgood]

Another scientist? What is your credentials?

Look at a picture of the statue of Liberty a hundred years ago and today. Sea level hasn't risen. What's your credentials, were you one of the loons that said we would be gone by the year 2000?

 

[Crepitus]

You are trying to equivocate.

It ain't working...

Nope. I'm telling the truth.

I understand your difficulty though. You are exposed to the truth so infrequently that you have trouble recognizing it when you are.

 

[citygator]

Look at a picture of the statue of Liberty a hundred years ago and today. Sea level hasn't risen. What's your credentials, were you one of the loons that said we would be gone by the year 2000?

My credentials? I am not making claims almost all scientist reject. Nor am I a nitwit who simply looks at a picture and says “see?”. I can read all kinds of information from scientists and the vast majority of them are aligned. Rando online posters don’t impress me.

 

[jknowgood]

My credentials? I am not making claims almost all scientist reject. Nor am I a nitwit who simply looks at a picture and says “see?”. I can read all kinds of information from scientists and the vast majority of them are aligned. Rando online posters don’t impress me.

My credentials? I am not making claims almost all scientist reject. Nor am I a nitwit who simply looks at a picture and says “see?”. I can read all kinds of information from scientists and the vast majority of them are aligned. Rando online posters don’t impress me.

Well the first prediction was coastal front property would be under water. Then that picture is proof you loons are lying, one hundred years apart. I don't need a degree to see that was a lie. Just like all the ten year out predictions you loons do, and are never right. Liberalism is based on a lie, prove me wrong.

 

[Mack The Finger]

IF you are an ACTIVIST for a cause for 5 or more years, you had better be certain that cause is 100% factually accurate, because if it isn't, if it gets outed as complete fraud....

I have been a Bobcat* for over 50 years.

He has been telling us the whole world is crazy all that time.

* Bob Dylan fan

 

[HikerGuy83]

I'm not threatening them, I'm pointing out your error in judgement.

It's not an error you moron. He's not as partisan as you.

 

[HikerGuy83]

If you get brave enough to post your credentials so I can determine if your opinion is important or not tag me so I can come back to this thread and ask you expert questions if warranted.

Who do you think you are.

Take a long walk on a short pier.

 

[citygator]

Who do you think you are.

Take a long walk on a short pier.

That was a post to someone making claims counter to scientific consensus so I was asking for his credentials. Like I am going to listen to some poster making outlier claims without understanding if he is highly qualified to make the claim or not. How else can I evaluate extraordinary claims unless I see extraordinary credentials?

 

[Billiejeens]

You just condemned the entire upper echelon of the republican party to death along with the management of fox new, breitbart, newsmax and others.

Your echo chamber Cult does you wrong

 

[SweetTea]

Youre in the minority there but let’s use some super simple logic. IF you are wrong what is the worst case scenario for us? IF you are right and we spend money to cut back on emissions what is the worst case scenario?

We could apply that same logic to those that deny God and put all their eggs in the science basket. Why risk eternal damnation just so they can yuck it up while alive here on earth? Many Democrats fall into this category, so I guess their logic is selective, depending on the issue at hand.

 

[JoeB131]

We could apply that same logic to those that deny God and put all their eggs in the science basket. Why risk eternal damnation just so they can yuck it up while alive here on earth? Many Democrats fall into this category, so I guess their logic is selective, depending on the issue at hand.

Again, have to ask the question, what if you get to the afterlife and you find out that the Muslims were right?

 

[SweetTea]

Again, have to ask the question, what if you get to the afterlife and you find out that the Muslims were right?

And what if you get there and find out that at least one of them was? You are taking the 0% chance rout. That is illogical.

 

[Billiejeens]

You just announced your idiocy on a public forum, little lady.

SOP for creepy

 

[Crepitus]

It's not an error you moron. He's not as partisan as you.

Two lies in one post!

You're getting good at that.

 

[Crepitus]

That was a post to someone making claims counter to scientific consensus so I was asking for his credentials. Like I am going to listen to some poster making outlier claims without understanding if he is highly qualified to make the claim or not. How else can I evaluate extraordinary claims unless I see extraordinary credentials?