Link Between Climate Denial and Conspiracy Beliefs Sparks Conspiracy Theories

[RollingThunder]

I've peer reviewed this post and find it totally awesome in its total awesomeness.

I guess one clueless retarded moron reviewing the brainless drivel spewed by another clueless retarded moron is, in fact, technically, a sort of "peer-review". LOLOLOLOL.

A shame that subtleties like irony are lost to a drooling cementhead like you.

....says the clueless retarded moron who wouldn't know 'irony' if it bit him.

 

[Oddball]

Look who's yapping!

 

[RollingThunder]

Look who's yapping!

Yeah....look at Screwball yapping mindlessly away about subjects he is far too retarded to comprehend.

 

[Oddball]

Look who's yapping!

Yeah....look at Screwball yapping mindlessly away about subjects he is far too retarded to comprehend.

I haven't noticed the slightest indication that you have first idea of what you're blabbering about viz. this particular subject, or any subject matter for that matter.

All you do is copy-n-paste crap from websites and blogs, as though you have the vaguest clue about anything. ...Then you sit there barking and ankle gnawing anyone and everyone who shows you for the loutish half-witted bullshitter that you are....There's a reason you're known as Trolling Blunder, Corky.

But at least you got that there pretty avatar now.

 

[RollingThunder]

Look who's yapping!

Yeah....look at Screwball yapping mindlessly away about subjects he is far too retarded to comprehend.

I haven't noticed the slightest indication that you have first idea of what you're blabbering about viz. this particular subject, or any subject matter for that matter.

Ah....there you go, Screwball, talking to yourself again....you're such a classic victim of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.....too clueless and stupid to even be able to recognize just how clueless and stupid you are relative to everybody else.....you poor pathetic retard....

All you do is copy-n-paste crap from websites and blogs, as though you have the vaguest clue about anything.

Yeah, all I do is present evidence (a concept you seem to be totally unfamiliar with) in support of the truth by citing the testimony of the most prominent and respected scientists in the world who publish peer reviewed papers in the major science journals. You blow hot air with no substance or support. I understand the reality of the situation while you remain in a state of acute denial and rejection of reality. You are the victim of a clever and well financed propaganda campaign the fossil fuel industry engineered to confuse the most gullible and least scientifically literate portion of the population - in other words - ignorant, imbecilic, 'faith-based' rednecks like you and the other denier cult dingbats.

 

[SSDD]

I haven't noticed the slightest indication that you have first idea of what you're blabbering about viz. this particular subject, or any subject matter for that matter.

All you do is copy-n-paste crap from websites and blogs, as though you have the vaguest clue about anything. ...Then you sit there barking and ankle gnawing anyone and everyone who shows you for the loutish half-witted bullshitter that you are....There's a reason you're known as Trolling Blunder, Corky.

But at least you got that there pretty avatar now.

It is a purrty avatar aint it? I have reviewed about as many of his posts as I could stomach and you seem to be right. I can't find any instance at all where he actually talks about any of the science involved. He cuts and pastes some bit of bilge and then calls names and slings $hit like a monkey in a cage. That seems to be the extent of is value to the board.

 

[SSDD]

Yeah, all I do is present evidence (a concept you seem to be totally unfamiliar with) in support of the truth by citing the testimony of the most prominent and respected scientists in the world who publish peer reviewed papers in the major science journals.

I haven't seen anything that you have posted that looks like evidence unless you have a pretty skewed internal definition of what evidence actually is. Could you provide a link to some of the "evidence" that you have supposedly posted.

I am a skeptic because of a compete lack of real evidence coming out of the climate science community. Everything seems to be either model output or based on model output which is not evidence as models of physical systems are only as good as the understanding of they physics involved.

So if you don't mind, could you post a link to some of that evidence you believe you have posted?

 

[RollingThunder]

Yeah, all I do is present evidence (a concept you seem to be totally unfamiliar with) in support of the truth by citing the testimony of the most prominent and respected scientists in the world who publish peer reviewed papers in the major science journals.

I haven't seen anything that you have posted that looks like evidence

Well, as I just said: "evidence (a concept you seem to be totally unfamiliar with)".

It is too bad that you're too ignorant and retarded to be able to recognize 'evidence' when you see it.

Try looking again, little retard.

Here, here, here, and here, for a few examples out of many.

 

[RollingThunder]

It seems like time to give this thread a *bump*, seeing as how there's just so many AGW conspiracy theory nutjobs on the forum now.

 

[SSDD]

What a lame attempt to marginalize people who don't follow in lock-step. I know that Man-caused climate change is complete bull shit yet I don't believe in: 9-11 conspiracy, faked moon landing, any Kennedy assassination conspiracy, alien visitations, alien abductions or any of that non-sense.

In fact, a healthy dose of skepticism is required to sift through the bull shit that is the AGW religion and that same skeptical mind prevents belief in the nut ball conspiracy theories.

Sorry, you lose and the author of that article is an idiot.

That sort of thing is the most blatant evidence that climate science is losing. If it were half what the people who write that sort of claptrap think it is, then the argument would be won based on its merits rather than trying to marginalize those who see that the emperor is, in fact, bare assed naked.

 

[PredFan]

The exact opposite is true. Any skeptic worth his salt is just as skeptical of the AGW religion as he/she is of Conspiracy Theories.

The OP and the article posted is complete non-sense.

 

[RollingThunder]

What a lame attempt to marginalize people who don't follow in lock-step. I know that Man-caused climate change is complete bull shit yet I don't believe in: 9-11 conspiracy, faked moon landing, any Kennedy assassination conspiracy, alien visitations, alien abductions or any of that non-sense.

In fact, a healthy dose of skepticism is required to sift through the bull shit that is the AGW religion and that same skeptical mind prevents belief in the nut ball conspiracy theories.

Sorry, you lose and the author of that article is an idiot.

That sort of thing is the most blatant evidence that climate science is losing. If it were half what the people who write that sort of claptrap think it is, then the argument would be won based on its merits rather than trying to marginalize those who see that the emperor is, in fact, bare assed naked.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.....oh, SSoooDDuuumb, you are soooooooooo dumb.......

Climate science "won the argument", as you put it, a long time ago, as everyone who isn't brainwashed or retarded knows. At this point we're just poking fun at you 'flat earthers' for being so retarded and so very gullible. The OP is about a study that demonstrates a strong correlation between the denial of AGW and a general tendency to get taken in by idiotic conspiracy theories. The behavior of you and the other denier kooks on here just reinforces and further demonstrates the conclusions of that study.

 

[RollingThunder]

The exact opposite is true. Any skeptic worth his salt is just as skeptical of the AGW religion as he/she is of Conspiracy Theories.

The OP and the article posted is complete non-sense.

But you are not an actual "skeptic", you are a "denier", and there is a very big difference. The OP concerns a valid scientific study that you don't like 'cause it highlights how wacko you denier crackpots really are.

Skeptics, Contrarians, or Deniers?

That “Denier vs Septic” thing again

Why real skeptics detest global warming Deniers


***

 

[Oddball]

Speaking of denial, the crap warmist hack piece in the OP invokes the completely debunked "97%" lie.

Quit reading after that.

 

[RollingThunder]

Speaking of denial, the crap warmist hack piece in the OP invokes the completely debunked "97%" lie.

Quit reading after that.

Oh Screwball, it is soooo funny when you pretend that you actually read any of the evidence or studies. It is even more hilarious that you imagine that the braindead drivel that you denier cultists pass back and forth could ever "debunk" any actual science.

Here's one study among many that all show the same results.

Expert credibility in climate change
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

William R. L. Anderegg a , 1 ,
James W. Prall b ,
Jacob Harold c , and
Stephen H. Schneider a , d , 1

This article contains supporting information online at Expert credibility in climate change ? Expert credibility in climate change ? Expert credibility in climate change ? Supporting Information.

Freely available online through the PNAS open access option.

Contributed by Stephen H. Schneider, April 9, 2010 (sent for review December 22, 2009)

Abstract

Although preliminary estimates from published literature and expert surveys suggest striking agreement among climate scientists on the tenets of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), the American public expresses substantial doubt about both the anthropogenic cause and the level of scientific agreement underpinning ACC. A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

 

[Oddball]

The "97%" were self-selected, nitwit.

 

[RollingThunder]

The "97%" were self-selected, nitwit.

LOLOLOLOLOL......you are soooooo retarded.....you can't even read one paragraph and comprehend it.....the study I just cited was a study of publications in the climate science field and no, little retard, they were not "self-selected".

 

[Oddball]

It's not my fault that you're too much of a stupid hack parrot to know the ancient news that your 97% meme is a total crock of shit.

But please, feel free to keep looking like the complete retard that you are.

 

[RollingThunder]

It's not my fault that you're too much of a stupid hack parrot to know the ancient news that your 97% meme is a total crock of shit.

As usual for a retarded denier cultist, you make claims that you can't back up with any evidence because there is no actual evidence, just denier cult myths. I backed up my assertions with a scientific study that was peer-reviewed and published in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. You just spew more hot air and lame bullcrap.

But please, feel free to keep looking like the complete retard that you are.

LOLOL......I see that you're talking to yourself again. You are such a crazy little screwball.

 

[skookerasbil]

This thread is gay.

Who cares?


Who is spiking the football???

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

[/IMG]







= the conspiracy guys are not losing.

[/IMG]