Obama mocks skeptics of climate change as ‘flat-Earth society’

[Wyatt earp]

Kind of ironic since the flat earthers were the ones that ignored the scientific data like the global warming worshipers.

This could only be a worth while statement if the flat earthers were first but alas they knew way before that in Alexander the Greats time that the Earth was round. I am still curious how that knowledge was lost in ghe 1200's~ !400's? must of been the Al Bore of the day trying to make a quick buck and spread the rumour the earth was flat. lol

Another dumb ****. Again, it was the Church that did the flat earth foolishness.

it was also a catholic priest who came up with the big bang theory Asshat.....

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The scientific consensus today, that is for the moment, right now, is that there has been no warming for at least 16 years.

And you are full of shit.

What has global warming done since 1998?

State of the Climate

1934 is the hottest year on record

In every bodies ranking, all ten of the hottest years on record have occured since 1998.

Climate change: The hottest years on record | The Economist

 

[Old Rocks]

1. There are scientists on both sides of the issue.

2. There has been a lot of institutional malfeasance regarding the issue. A lot of politicians in bed with the academic community.

3. Do you know why they stopped calling it global warming and started calling it global climate change? Because they realized that the gig was up on the pseudo science and they realized that it was an easier narrative to spin to pinheads like yourself. Guess what? Climate change is cyclical. It's always changing!

4. CO2 is not the enemy. That's the biggest pseudo science of all. CO2 is great for the atmosphere, but politicians have realized that they can make money by creating a false matter to regulate.

5. Pseudo science is a lucrative business. Al Gore doesn't have half a billion bucks in his pocket because he invented the internet.

1. There are scientists on both sides of the issues.

Sure. 97% on one side, 3% on the other. And of those 3%, they are either senile, or outright whores for the energy corperations.

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

The "97%-ers" are outright liars, like you.....That bullshit number was debunked within 24 hours of its release and you know it.

Really? I think that you do not know much at all.

Expert credibility in climate change

Expert credibility in climate change

William R. L. Anderegga,1,
James W. Prallb,
Jacob Haroldc, and
Stephen H. Schneidera,d,1

Author Affiliations


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.

PNAS is the Publication of the National Academy of Science.

 

[Old Rocks]

The scientific consensus today, that is for the moment, right now, is that there has been no warming for at least 16 years.

And you are full of shit.

What has global warming done since 1998?

State of the Climate

1934 is the hottest year on record

In every bodies ranking, all ten of the hottest years on record have occured since 1998.

Climate change: The hottest years on record | The Economist

In other words you are too senile and old to bother to look at real information.

 

[Amelia]

Whether climate change is affected by us puny humans or not, Obama is an ass.

He's been trashtalking us since before the 2008 election and still his sycophants blame us for not falling in line and supporting him and helping him achieve his agenda. Do they fall in line and support someone who trashtalks them? If so, they need to get help.

You mean while Republicans were playing "Barack the Magic Negro" at campaign headquarters?

A. Played at campaign headquarters? That link says a Paul Shanklin parody CD was handed out by one person to some RNC members. It does not say the song was played at campaign headquarters.

B. Barack the Magic Negro was a meme introduced by a black liberal.

C. The parody on the black liberal's comments was written after Obama had already called half of his would-be constituency bitter clingers.

The question stands, do you fall in line and support someone who has slammed you? If you forgive them once, do you keep forgiving them when they do it over and over? If so, get help.

 

[Old Rocks]

This could only be a worth while statement if the flat earthers were first but alas they knew way before that in Alexander the Greats time that the Earth was round. I am still curious how that knowledge was lost in ghe 1200's~ !400's? must of been the Al Bore of the day trying to make a quick buck and spread the rumour the earth was flat. lol

Another dumb ****. Again, it was the Church that did the flat earth foolishness.

it was also a catholic priest who came up with the big bang theory Asshat.....

Which has what to do with who was pushing ignorance back in the Middle Ages? The Catholic Church has come a long way in it's acceptance of science. Even to the point of expressing regret concerning it's treatment of Galileo.

 

[Oddball]

1. There are scientists on both sides of the issues.

Sure. 97% on one side, 3% on the other. And of those 3%, they are either senile, or outright whores for the energy corperations.

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

The "97%-ers" are outright liars, like you.....That bullshit number was debunked within 24 hours of its release and you know it.

Really? I think that you do not know much at all.

Expert credibility in climate change

Expert credibility in climate change

William R. L. Anderegga,1,
James W. Prallb,
Jacob Haroldc, and
Stephen H. Schneidera,d,1

Author Affiliations


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.

PNAS is the Publication of the National Academy of Science.

I do know that the 97% number was gleaned from a pool who self-selected.....Not everyone who was presented with that poll answered it....And you know this...Which makes you a bold-faced liar.

But it's not too shocking to find that 97% of the people involved with keeping the hoax going would say that they believe it's true.

 

[Old Rocks]

Whether climate change is affected by us puny humans or not, Obama is an ass.

He's been trashtalking us since before the 2008 election and still his sycophants blame us for not falling in line and supporting him and helping him achieve his agenda. Do they fall in line and support someone who trashtalks them? If so, they need to get help.

You mean while Republicans were playing "Barack the Magic Negro" at campaign headquarters?

A. Played at campaign headquarters? That link says a Paul Shanklin parody CD was handed out by one person to some RNC members. It does not say the song was played at campaign headquarters.

B. Barack the Magic Negro was a meme introduced by a black liberal.

C. The parody on the black liberal's comments was written after Obama had already called half of his would-be constituency bitter clingers.

The question stands, do you fall in line and support someone who has slammed you? If you forgive them once, do you keep forgiving them when they do it over and over? If so, get help.

The fruitloop 'Conservatives' are never going to 'fall in line and support President Obama'. They will vote against their own interests in order to vote against our President. It is long past time that the President comes right out and says it like it is. The people denying reality are stupid and endangering their own children.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

And you are full of shit.

What has global warming done since 1998?

State of the Climate

1934 is the hottest year on record

In every bodies ranking, all ten of the hottest years on record have occured since 1998.

Climate change: The hottest years on record | The Economist

In other words you are too senile and old to bother to look at real information.

There is no evidence I can present to you that you wont turn to some blogspot or other nonsense to try and explain it away. Youre a true believer in Goebbel's Warming. You will not be converted to a healthy approach to the issue. To you, this is a religion, not science.

 

[mudwhistle]

No, the biggest scam of all is that people like you think that obese junkies on the radio, and people pretending to be British Lords, neither having any scientific credentials, know more than the scientists.

Willfull ignorance is ugly in the best of circumstances.

1. There are scientists on both sides of the issue.

2. There has been a lot of institutional malfeasance regarding the issue. A lot of politicians in bed with the academic community.

3. Do you know why they stopped calling it global warming and started calling it global climate change? Because they realized that the gig was up on the pseudo science and they realized that it was an easier narrative to spin to pinheads like yourself. Guess what? Climate change is cyclical. It's always changing!

4. CO2 is not the enemy. That's the biggest pseudo science of all. CO2 is great for the atmosphere, but politicians have realized that they can make money by creating a false matter to regulate.

5. Pseudo science is a lucrative business. Al Gore doesn't have half a billion bucks in his pocket because he invented the internet.

1. There are scientists on both sides of the issues.

Sure. 97% on one side, 3% on the other. And of those 3%, they are either senile, or outright whores for the energy corperations.

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

2. There has been a lot of institutional malfeasance regarding the issue. A lot of politicians in bed with the academic community.

Absolutely hysterical. Between the academic community and big oil, who do you think pays the politicians the most? If you think the academic community is rich, I have some sea shore property in Nebraska to sell you.

3. They did not stop calling it global warming. Climate change is the result of global warming. You warm the globe, you change the climate. This is the kind of idiot meme you fools feast on.

4. CO2 is not the enemy.

CO2 is a GHG. That was established by Tyndall in 1858. It is the primary GHG at present, although a major outgassing from the Arctic Clathrates could change that. Here is the history of the scientific investigation of CO2 and it's effects on the climate;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

5. Psuedo-science is a lucrative business. Al Gore doesn't have half a billion dollars in his pocket because he invented the internet.

Now that is one dumb assertation. Al Gore has a half billion in his pocket because he invested wisely in the high-tech market when that market was on a downer. His fortune has little to do with his lectures or his award winning documentary.

It is idiots like you that are heavily invested in pseudo-science. Look at the raft of characters that give you your talking points. An obese junkie on the radio. A fraud claiming to be a British Lord, who has no degree in any science, an undegreed ex-TV weatherman. And on and on. No science, just lies and flap-yap.

And every single time the Liar In Chief attempts to change the subject to some hairbrained topic you twerps start parroting like he wasn't caught lying to us about the IRS and the NSA.

 

[Old Rocks]

The "97%-ers" are outright liars, like you.....That bullshit number was debunked within 24 hours of its release and you know it.

Really? I think that you do not know much at all.

Expert credibility in climate change

Expert credibility in climate change

William R. L. Anderegga,1,
James W. Prallb,
Jacob Haroldc, and
Stephen H. Schneidera,d,1

Author Affiliations


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.

PNAS is the Publication of the National Academy of Science.

I do know that the 97% number was gleaned from a pool who self-selected.....Not everyone who was presented with that poll answered it....And you know this...Which makes you a bold-faced liar.

But it's not too shocking to find that 97% of the people involved with keeping the hoax going would say that they believe it's true.

Come on, Oddie, then find me a Scientific Society, even one from Outer Slobovia, that states that AGW is not happening. How about the Academy of Science of some nation that makes that statement? Or even a major University.

 

[Old Rocks]

1. There are scientists on both sides of the issue.

2. There has been a lot of institutional malfeasance regarding the issue. A lot of politicians in bed with the academic community.

3. Do you know why they stopped calling it global warming and started calling it global climate change? Because they realized that the gig was up on the pseudo science and they realized that it was an easier narrative to spin to pinheads like yourself. Guess what? Climate change is cyclical. It's always changing!

4. CO2 is not the enemy. That's the biggest pseudo science of all. CO2 is great for the atmosphere, but politicians have realized that they can make money by creating a false matter to regulate.

5. Pseudo science is a lucrative business. Al Gore doesn't have half a billion bucks in his pocket because he invented the internet.

1. There are scientists on both sides of the issues.

Sure. 97% on one side, 3% on the other. And of those 3%, they are either senile, or outright whores for the energy corperations.

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

2. There has been a lot of institutional malfeasance regarding the issue. A lot of politicians in bed with the academic community.

Absolutely hysterical. Between the academic community and big oil, who do you think pays the politicians the most? If you think the academic community is rich, I have some sea shore property in Nebraska to sell you.

3. They did not stop calling it global warming. Climate change is the result of global warming. You warm the globe, you change the climate. This is the kind of idiot meme you fools feast on.

4. CO2 is not the enemy.

CO2 is a GHG. That was established by Tyndall in 1858. It is the primary GHG at present, although a major outgassing from the Arctic Clathrates could change that. Here is the history of the scientific investigation of CO2 and it's effects on the climate;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

5. Psuedo-science is a lucrative business. Al Gore doesn't have half a billion dollars in his pocket because he invented the internet.

Now that is one dumb assertation. Al Gore has a half billion in his pocket because he invested wisely in the high-tech market when that market was on a downer. His fortune has little to do with his lectures or his award winning documentary.

It is idiots like you that are heavily invested in pseudo-science. Look at the raft of characters that give you your talking points. An obese junkie on the radio. A fraud claiming to be a British Lord, who has no degree in any science, an undegreed ex-TV weatherman. And on and on. No science, just lies and flap-yap.

And every single time the Liar In Chief attempts to change the subject to some hairbrained topic you twerps start parroting like he wasn't caught lying to us about the IRS and the NSA.

Oh my. Losing on this issue!!!!! Change the subject real quick.

Stupid troll.

 

[Oddball]

Really? I think that you do not know much at all.

Expert credibility in climate change

Expert credibility in climate change

William R. L. Anderegga,1,
James W. Prallb,
Jacob Haroldc, and
Stephen H. Schneidera,d,1

Author Affiliations


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.

PNAS is the Publication of the National Academy of Science.

I do know that the 97% number was gleaned from a pool who self-selected.....Not everyone who was presented with that poll answered it....And you know this...Which makes you a bold-faced liar.

But it's not too shocking to find that 97% of the people involved with keeping the hoax going would say that they believe it's true.

Come on, Oddie, then find me a Scientific Society, even one from Outer Slobovia, that states that AGW is not happening. How about the Academy of Science of some nation that makes that statement? Or even a major University.

You're changing the subject...The 97% number is an outright lie and you know it....Which makes you a willing participant in the lie.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Old Rocks believes in model based evidence of Goebbel's Warming.

 

[Amelia]

You mean while Republicans were playing "Barack the Magic Negro" at campaign headquarters?

A. Played at campaign headquarters? That link says a Paul Shanklin parody CD was handed out by one person to some RNC members. It does not say the song was played at campaign headquarters.

B. Barack the Magic Negro was a meme introduced by a black liberal.

C. The parody on the black liberal's comments was written after Obama had already called half of his would-be constituency bitter clingers.

The question stands, do you fall in line and support someone who has slammed you? If you forgive them once, do you keep forgiving them when they do it over and over? If so, get help.

The fruitloop 'Conservatives' are never going to 'fall in line and support President Obama'. They will vote against their own interests in order to vote against our President. It is long past time that the President comes right out and says it like it is. The people denying reality are stupid and endangering their own children.

You know, you're probably right. They probably never would have.

Too bad he missed the opportunity to claim the high ground by giving people a chance to support him before he trashed them.

And too bad he continues to double down on that.

bwgd

 

[Old Rocks]

In other words you are too senile and old to bother to look at real information.

There is no evidence I can present to you that you wont turn to some blogspot or other nonsense to try and explain it away. Youre a true believer in Goebbel's Warming. You will not be converted to a healthy approach to the issue. To you, this is a religion, not science.

Old fart, I look at the scientific evidence, not the mewling and puking of the rightwing fruitloops on a scientific subject. No, it is not a religion, that is your purvue. After all, I am looking at the evidence, not going on blind faith that nothing is happening.

And this is not a blogspot, it is the creme of the crop in Geophysical Sciences presenting their researchs to their peers.

A23A

You can go to any year since 2009, AGU Convention, and get the videos of the lectures presented at that meeting. That is the evidence that I go by and present.

 

[Bfgrn]

Whether climate change is affected by us puny humans or not, Obama is an ass.

He's been trashtalking us since before the 2008 election and still his sycophants blame us for not falling in line and supporting him and helping him achieve his agenda. Do they fall in line and support someone who trashtalks them? If so, they need to get help.

You mean while Republicans were playing "Barack the Magic Negro" at campaign headquarters?

A. Played at campaign headquarters? That link says a Paul Shanklin parody CD was handed out by one person to some RNC members. It does not say the song was played at campaign headquarters.

B. Barack the Magic Negro was a meme introduced by a black liberal.

C. The parody on the black liberal's comments was written after Obama had already called half of his would-be constituency bitter clingers.

The question stands, do you fall in line and support someone who has slammed you? If you forgive them once, do you keep forgiving them when they do it over and over? If so, get help.

Try being honest for ONCE in your life. There is NOTHING Obama could do or could have done that would gain your support.

 

[Oddball]

In other words you are too senile and old to bother to look at real information.

There is no evidence I can present to you that you wont turn to some blogspot or other nonsense to try and explain it away. Youre a true believer in Goebbel's Warming. You will not be converted to a healthy approach to the issue. To you, this is a religion, not science.

Old fart, I look at the scientific evidence, not the mewling and puking of the rightwing fruitloops on a scientific subject. No, it is not a religion, that is your purvue. After all, I am looking at the evidence, not going on blind faith that nothing is happening.

And this is not a blogspot, it is the creme of the crop in Geophysical Sciences presenting their researchs to their peers.

A23A

You can go to any year since 2009, AGU Convention, and get the videos of the lectures presented at that meeting. That is the evidence that I go by and present.

Right....You go by the words of the high priests inside the Holy Church of Goebbels Warming....Just like the people who believed that the world was flat did.

Another classic case of Freudian projection from the cult.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You believe in computer model based evidence. This says it all, box of rocks. it's actually funny how much you bloviate and in the end, it all comes down to passing off models as evidence.

 

[Amelia]

You mean while Republicans were playing "Barack the Magic Negro" at campaign headquarters?

A. Played at campaign headquarters? That link says a Paul Shanklin parody CD was handed out by one person to some RNC members. It does not say the song was played at campaign headquarters.

B. Barack the Magic Negro was a meme introduced by a black liberal.

C. The parody on the black liberal's comments was written after Obama had already called half of his would-be constituency bitter clingers.

The question stands, do you fall in line and support someone who has slammed you? If you forgive them once, do you keep forgiving them when they do it over and over? If so, get help.

Try being honest for ONCE in your life. There is NOTHING Obama could do or could have done that would gain your support.

Untrue.