More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[PMZ]

Hey skinhead Barbie.. You're all about the science and your quoting a biased poll?

Looks like Abraham has another "enlightened" playmate on his side..

What's the evidence that the poll is biased?

The 97% survey I've talking about was completely conceived and commissioned by that toxic waste dump blog known as skepticalscience.com.. AND they made that LEAP by chucking out the MAJORITY of the papers that they reviewed because they made no JUDGEMENTS on CO2 vis a vis Global Warming and got the 97% factoid from only climate papers that LEAPT to a conclusion. So -- the ACCURATE statement would be that --- the VAST MAJORITY of Climate Scientists -- expressed "no opinion" on the CO2 theory..

Furthermore --- Even in the case of just the studies that DID express opinions --- they counted ALL AUTHORS as agreeing. This is simply not factually documented. There is no rule that says ALL the authors of a paper agree with or ENDORSE the politically charged "opinions" in the Abstract or Conclusions sections.

In short asstroll --- for THREE good reasons --- it's pure litterbox material...
Why am i discussing this with an asstroll? Because you're constantly amazing me with your LACK OF RETENTION and STUPIDITY.. You were there when this was discussed before.

I see that you're allergic to science. Tough break. Try religion. I think that you might have the makings of a good TV evangelist.

 

[skookerasbil]

If you win, we do nothing about energy and when we run out and the planet is not capable of sustaining the population, we'll remember your cartoons and in your face blatant ignorance.

But, not to worry. You will lose before that happens.

Indeed s0n!!!








but bubble dwellars are gay

 

[skookerasbil]

The Final Frontier is gay

 

[skookerasbil]

Like the guy says........the climate science isn't mattering in the real world!!

 

[Abraham3]

Is that why you spend so much time here?

 

[skookerasbil]

Is that why you spend so much time here?

Hey......I gotta tell you......if the climate k00ks split this forum, Id be long gone. The science is boring as shit since its almost entirely junk science, so this forum, and specifically, this thread, becomes all about illustrating who's not winning!!

 

[mamooth]

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

How'd Cuccinelli, do? You know, the denialist superhero, the attempted banisher-to-the-gulag of climate scientists like Dr. Mann.

Oh, that's right. The Cucc lost. Partly because of his denialism. Chased a lot of donors off. And no, it wasn't because of the libertarian in the race, who drew more votes away from the Democrat.

So, the nation doesn't seem to approve of the stalinist tactics of the denialists. Skook, your future looks kind of bleak.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

How'd Cuccinelli, do? You know, the denialist superhero, the attempted banisher-to-the-gulag of climate scientists like Dr. Mann.

Oh, that's right. The Cucc lost. Partly because of his denialism. Chased a lot of donors off. And no, it wasn't because of the libertarian in the race, who drew more votes away from the Democrat.

So, the nation doesn't seem to approve of the stalinist tactics of the denialists. Skook, your future looks kind of bleak.

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

The rational crowd voted 95-0 against Kyoto while Clinton was President.
Can't see a more rational rejection of AGW than that.

 

[PMZ]

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

How'd Cuccinelli, do? You know, the denialist superhero, the attempted banisher-to-the-gulag of climate scientists like Dr. Mann.

Oh, that's right. The Cucc lost. Partly because of his denialism. Chased a lot of donors off. And no, it wasn't because of the libertarian in the race, who drew more votes away from the Democrat.

So, the nation doesn't seem to approve of the stalinist tactics of the denialists. Skook, your future looks kind of bleak.

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

The rational crowd voted 95-0 against Kyoto while Clinton was President.
Can't see a more rational rejection of AGW than that.

Did you expect that everyone who understands Climate Science and the reality of AGW would support Kyoto?

You don't know independent thinkers. Probably never met one.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

How'd Cuccinelli, do? You know, the denialist superhero, the attempted banisher-to-the-gulag of climate scientists like Dr. Mann.

Oh, that's right. The Cucc lost. Partly because of his denialism. Chased a lot of donors off. And no, it wasn't because of the libertarian in the race, who drew more votes away from the Democrat.

So, the nation doesn't seem to approve of the stalinist tactics of the denialists. Skook, your future looks kind of bleak.

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

The rational crowd voted 95-0 against Kyoto while Clinton was President.
Can't see a more rational rejection of AGW than that.

Did you expect that everyone who understands Climate Science and the reality of AGW would support Kyoto?

You don't know independent thinkers. Probably never met one.

Did I expect Kyoto would get zero votes under a Dem President? LOL!

 

[PMZ]

If "losing" means the rational crowd keeps winning elections, bring on more of Skook's "losing".

The rational crowd voted 95-0 against Kyoto while Clinton was President.
Can't see a more rational rejection of AGW than that.

Did you expect that everyone who understands Climate Science and the reality of AGW would support Kyoto?

You don't know independent thinkers. Probably never met one.

Did I expect Kyoto would get zero votes under a Dem President? LOL!

You realize that the President is not in Congress, right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Did you expect that everyone who understands Climate Science and the reality of AGW would support Kyoto?

You don't know independent thinkers. Probably never met one.

Did I expect Kyoto would get zero votes under a Dem President? LOL!

You realize that the President is not in Congress, right?

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

 

[PMZ]

Did I expect Kyoto would get zero votes under a Dem President? LOL!

You realize that the President is not in Congress, right?

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

 

[westwall]

You realize that the President is not in Congress, right?

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

Dysfunctional pretenders? You mean like the majority of progressive's?

 

[freedombecki]

You realize that the President is not in Congress, right?

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

So now it's just a matter of ousting Obama, Holder, Sebelius, Pelosi, Reid, Hillary Clinton, and others listed here: 10 most corrupt politicians in America.

Obama only apologized for "misspeaking," which is a euphemism for lying about knowing ahead of time that tens of millions of Americans would lose their present insurance coverage, so he could swoop in, be a hero, and "save" the system in order to institute his failed unaffordable care act named as "affordable," only to fool his constituents and heist other Americans to double their coverage to make up the slack he knew the government could not afford.

It's kind of like telling Israel he would support them while at the same time he secretly lifted the Iran sanctions. Now, where we had an ally, we have a very angry Netanyahu Obama snubs every time he gets a chance.

Obama is dysfunctional, because he lets his personal loyalty to foreign interests get in the way of American interests and treaties we have to honor on account of the liabilities his friends inflicted on the world in WWII.

He needs to be replaced immediately by someone who is friend to America and America's friends.

If his behavior hasn't extended his mentor's thesis of "God damn America," I don't know what else could more have effectively done that that how he misconducts America's interests to its detriment.

He's actually spit on his oath of office on a nearly daily basis like a criminal spits on any law that gets in his way of attaining other people's possessions.

He's now dispossessed 52,000,000 Americans from their health insurance providers in order to have the Federal Government take over 1/6th of the Nation's economy. Obama's rule has been America's worst horror flick.

 

[Abraham3]

So now it's just a matter of ousting Obama, Holder, Sebelius, Pelosi, Reid, Hillary Clinton, and others listed here: 10 most corrupt politicians in America.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

Judicial Watch is primarily funded by three extremely conservative foundations: the Sarah Scaife Foundation, The Carthage Foundation and the John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. So do not even pretend to think that their opinions are objective or lacking in political partisanship.

If you want to "oust" those people, you might want to talk to the people who elected them. And you might want to use terms more appropriate to a democracy, like "vote". When you say "oust", it's hard not to picture a coup d'etat. Is that what you're actually suggesting?

Obama only apologized for "misspeaking," which is a euphemism for lying about knowing ahead of time that tens of millions of Americans would lose their present insurance coverage, so he could swoop in, be a hero, and "save" the system in order to institute his failed unaffordable care act named as "affordable," only to fool his constituents and heist other Americans to double their coverage to make up the slack he knew the government could not afford.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

I've been reading a number of stories that find people who claim their insurance costs have gone up simply haven't done their homework; that when folks look in to their situations, it's found that better insurance is available for less money. And a large portion of the people losing their policies are simply suffering from insurance companies attempting to increase their profits by conning these people into buying more expensive policies, often by telling them outright lies. Again, you can hardly credit your sources with objectivity. If you can find a leading Republican trying to honestly discover how PPACA is working, I'll eat his hat.

It's kind of like telling Israel he would support them while at the same time he secretly lifted the Iran sanctions. Now, where we had an ally, we have a very angry Netanyahu Obama snubs every time he gets a chance.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

Pardon me, but screw Netanyahu. He's not in charge of our foreign policy. The president is. And the sanctions that Obama eased, Obama put into effect. He did so after the election of an actual reformer. If the president is not to be allowed to make use of both sticks and carrots in his dealings with other nations, you might as well eliminate the office.

Obama is dysfunctional, because he lets his personal loyalty to foreign interests get in the way of American interests and treaties we have to honor on account of the liabilities his friends inflicted on the world in WWII.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

The president has no personal loyalty towards foreign interests and is not "friends" with those who caused World War II.

Your statements are absurdist hyperbole.

He needs to be replaced immediately by someone who is friend to America and America's friends.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

"Immediately"? ? ? So... you're not willing to wait till the end of his term? I think maybe you've lost track of what it means to be an American. You've forgotten the Constitution and the rule of law.

If his behavior hasn't extended his mentor's thesis of "God damn America," I don't know what else could more have effectively done that that how he misconducts America's interests to its detriment.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

I do. You.

He's actually spit on his oath of office on a nearly daily basis like a criminal spits on any law that gets in his way of attaining other people's possessions.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

You need to stop spitting on the Constitution and read the thing cause you've got some serious misunderstandings in its regard.

He's now dispossessed 52,000,000 Americans from their health insurance providers in order to have the Federal Government take over 1/6th of the Nation's economy. Obama's rule has been America's worst horror flick.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

This statement is wrong on every count. The number of individuals who've found their policies didn't meet the new minimums is nowhere near that number. And of those, the majority will be getting better policies for less money. When PPACA was passed, 45 million Americans had NO medical insurance. The federal government has not taken over health care - they are forcing Americans to make use of COMMERCIAL health insurance in order to obtain COMMERCIAL medical care.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You realize that the President is not in Congress, right?

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

Nor a loss.

95-0 against an effort to reduce CO2 emissions is a loss.

 

[jon_berzerk]

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

Nor a loss.

95-0 against an effort to reduce CO2 emissions is a loss.

while back at home

the prezbo can battle the hoax

with executive orders to the EPA

although his directives will not be realized

until he has left office

 

[PMZ]

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

Dysfunctional pretenders? You mean like the majority of progressive's?

No, deniers of science.

 

[PMZ]

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

Nor a loss.

95-0 against an effort to reduce CO2 emissions is a loss.

while back at home

the prezbo can battle the hoax

with executive orders to the EPA

although his directives will not be realized

until he has left office

There are many ways to reduce GHGs. They are all underway. Nobody is going to follow denialist lemmings off of the cliff except other denialists.

Maybe you'll disprove science by showing that you can fly because you want to. Let us know how that works out for you.