Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Back in the early days of the tobacco fight, industry mavens considered the threat from accidental fire. The tobacco industry spokesmen determined that matches and lit cigarettes did not cause fires, couches and sofas did. So we got flame retardant fabrics as a result. But, that flame retardant turned out to be hazardous to humans. c'est l'gare!All of the denialist arguments (anti-evolution, anti-global warming, etc.=anti-science) have similar fallacious arguments, and all use the same arguments that were used by the tobacco industry to deny the fact that cigarette smoking causes disease. Coincidence?
Science denialism The problem that just won t go away EARTH Magazine
Often in our culture, science is rendered disposable if it stomps on a cherished claim; faith trumps reality. This attitude is internally inconsistent: Atomic theory is OK when we use it to X-ray our teeth or build a nuclear power station, but invalid when it comes to assessing the age of the planet. Evolutionary insight is OK when it guides the production of our annual flu shot, but deniers refuse to let it tell them from whence they came. Science is the way forward, but not for people who don’t want to go forward.
More at the link.
Can deny science to their heart's content. Great thing about science is if it's wrong it gets changed. If it isn't, it doesn't.
Climate deniers though are worse than just denying science in how they misrepresent facts as with claiming GW isn't happening because Antarctic sea ice is increasing. Which it is. But "sea ice" is seasonal and not contributing to sea level rise. "Land ice" however is. But they don't mention that.
and there it is!! How lovely you showed up with your nonsense. Typical time of day for you to add your worthless drivel. Now go report me and feel good about what you accomplished. Which is nothing.At this stage of the game, the only thing in question is which form of mental illness or personality disorder afflicts each particular denier.
With jc, we obviously have a histrionic personality disorder. He can't bear not being the center of attention.
Other commonly seen issues in deniers are:
Narcissism -- "I am incapable of error, as I know better than the rest of the world."
Paranoia -- "It's a conspiracy!"
Antisocial personality disorder-- "Fuck You!"
Schizophrenia -- "My voices told me what you what you really believe!"
Sociopathy -- "Repeating debunked lies for my cause is justified!"
hmmmmm strawman alert!!!!!Back in the early days of the tobacco fight, industry mavens considered the threat from accidental fire. The tobacco industry spokesmen determined that matches and lit cigarettes did not cause fires, couches and sofas did. So we got flame retardant fabrics as a result. But, that flame retardant turned out to be hazardous to humans. c'est l'gare!All of the denialist arguments (anti-evolution, anti-global warming, etc.=anti-science) have similar fallacious arguments, and all use the same arguments that were used by the tobacco industry to deny the fact that cigarette smoking causes disease. Coincidence?
Science denialism The problem that just won t go away EARTH Magazine
Often in our culture, science is rendered disposable if it stomps on a cherished claim; faith trumps reality. This attitude is internally inconsistent: Atomic theory is OK when we use it to X-ray our teeth or build a nuclear power station, but invalid when it comes to assessing the age of the planet. Evolutionary insight is OK when it guides the production of our annual flu shot, but deniers refuse to let it tell them from whence they came. Science is the way forward, but not for people who don’t want to go forward.
More at the link.
Can deny science to their heart's content. Great thing about science is if it's wrong it gets changed. If it isn't, it doesn't.
Climate deniers though are worse than just denying science in how they misrepresent facts as with claiming GW isn't happening because Antarctic sea ice is increasing. Which it is. But "sea ice" is seasonal and not contributing to sea level rise. "Land ice" however is. But they don't mention that.
At this stage of the game, the only thing in question is which form of mental illness or personality disorder afflicts each particular denier.
With jc, we obviously have a histrionic personality disorder. He can't bear not being the center of attention.
Other commonly seen issues in deniers are:
Narcissism -- "I am incapable of error, as I know better than the rest of the world."
Paranoia -- "It's a conspiracy!"
Antisocial personality disorder-- "Fuck You!"
Schizophrenia -- "My voices told me what you what you really believe!"
Sociopathy -- "Repeating debunked lies for my cause is justified!"
Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
hmmmmm strawman alert!!!!!Back in the early days of the tobacco fight, industry mavens considered the threat from accidental fire. The tobacco industry spokesmen determined that matches and lit cigarettes did not cause fires, couches and sofas did. So we got flame retardant fabrics as a result. But, that flame retardant turned out to be hazardous to humans. c'est l'gare!All of the denialist arguments (anti-evolution, anti-global warming, etc.=anti-science) have similar fallacious arguments, and all use the same arguments that were used by the tobacco industry to deny the fact that cigarette smoking causes disease. Coincidence?
Science denialism The problem that just won t go away EARTH Magazine
Often in our culture, science is rendered disposable if it stomps on a cherished claim; faith trumps reality. This attitude is internally inconsistent: Atomic theory is OK when we use it to X-ray our teeth or build a nuclear power station, but invalid when it comes to assessing the age of the planet. Evolutionary insight is OK when it guides the production of our annual flu shot, but deniers refuse to let it tell them from whence they came. Science is the way forward, but not for people who don’t want to go forward.
More at the link.
Can deny science to their heart's content. Great thing about science is if it's wrong it gets changed. If it isn't, it doesn't.
Climate deniers though are worse than just denying science in how they misrepresent facts as with claiming GW isn't happening because Antarctic sea ice is increasing. Which it is. But "sea ice" is seasonal and not contributing to sea level rise. "Land ice" however is. But they don't mention that.
Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
hahahahahaaha right?hmmmmm strawman alert!!!!!Back in the early days of the tobacco fight, industry mavens considered the threat from accidental fire. The tobacco industry spokesmen determined that matches and lit cigarettes did not cause fires, couches and sofas did. So we got flame retardant fabrics as a result. But, that flame retardant turned out to be hazardous to humans. c'est l'gare!All of the denialist arguments (anti-evolution, anti-global warming, etc.=anti-science) have similar fallacious arguments, and all use the same arguments that were used by the tobacco industry to deny the fact that cigarette smoking causes disease. Coincidence?
Science denialism The problem that just won t go away EARTH Magazine
Often in our culture, science is rendered disposable if it stomps on a cherished claim; faith trumps reality. This attitude is internally inconsistent: Atomic theory is OK when we use it to X-ray our teeth or build a nuclear power station, but invalid when it comes to assessing the age of the planet. Evolutionary insight is OK when it guides the production of our annual flu shot, but deniers refuse to let it tell them from whence they came. Science is the way forward, but not for people who don’t want to go forward.
More at the link.
Can deny science to their heart's content. Great thing about science is if it's wrong it gets changed. If it isn't, it doesn't.
Climate deniers though are worse than just denying science in how they misrepresent facts as with claiming GW isn't happening because Antarctic sea ice is increasing. Which it is. But "sea ice" is seasonal and not contributing to sea level rise. "Land ice" however is. But they don't mention that.
How is that a straw man?
they have never provided an experiment that shows what we asked. NEVER!Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
Yeah they showed us charts with CO2 but no temperature axis. How can you not be convinced???
yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
I don't care if you care or not. It is puzzling why you would come to a message board if you don't wish to participate in a discussion. Kind of like meaningless dude.yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
You are acting like I care. Take a class.
I don't care if you care or not. It is puzzling why you would come to a message board if you don't wish to participate in a discussion. Kind of like meaningless dude.yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
You are acting like I care. Take a class.
so interesting, you create a thread antagonizing a group,. I am a skeptic looking for answers, you don't think I deserve them.hmmmmmmmmmmm, who's the denier?I don't care if you care or not. It is puzzling why you would come to a message board if you don't wish to participate in a discussion. Kind of like meaningless dude.yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!
Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
You are acting like I care. Take a class.
This is my thread, bubba. And so far, as is usual, you have participated nothing to the discussion.
so interesting, you create a thread antagonizing a group,. I am a skeptic looking for answers, you don't think I deserve them.hmmmmmmmmmmm, who's the denier?I don't care if you care or not. It is puzzling why you would come to a message board if you don't wish to participate in a discussion. Kind of like meaningless dude.yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
You are acting like I care. Take a class.
This is my thread, bubba. And so far, as is usual, you have participated nothing to the discussion.
so interesting, you create a thread antagonizing a group,. I am a skeptic looking for answers, you don't think I deserve them.hmmmmmmmmmmm, who's the denier?I don't care if you care or not. It is puzzling why you would come to a message board if you don't wish to participate in a discussion. Kind of like meaningless dude.yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.
You are acting like I care. Take a class.
This is my thread, bubba. And so far, as is usual, you have participated nothing to the discussion.
You? A skeptic? Bwhahahahahahahahaha!
I don't care if you care or not. It is puzzling why you would come to a message board if you don't wish to participate in a discussion. Kind of like meaningless dude.yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!
Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
You are acting like I care. Take a class.
This is my thread, bubba. And so far, as is usual, you have participated nothing to the discussion.
I don't care if you care or not. It is puzzling why you would come to a message board if you don't wish to participate in a discussion. Kind of like meaningless dude.yeah right. you act like i'm the only one asking for it. So what you're saying is that we all are blind? Well you know what I say to that right? You know you haven't and let's stop playing games.Pretending the question you've asked 100 times hasn't already been answered at least 50 times is not only disingenuous, it is just another symptom of your denialism. Explain to the rest of us why you would continue to support the efforts of the petroleum industry in this matter knowing that they are lying? What is YOUR motive?
You are acting like I care. Take a class.
This is my thread, bubba. And so far, as is usual, you have participated nothing to the discussion.
Notice that you still haven't answered my question about how you tell a skeptic from a "denier." Why is that, Mr. "Science?"
Well real scientists test theories correct? So in the world of your scientists, have they tested what adding PPM of CO2 will do to temperatures? hmmmm, if so, you fail to present them. Those would be your scientists, the ones way smarter than average human beings who are asking that they provide them to believe them. Hmmmm, now why would that be, well perhaps it is other scientists who state things that don't align with your scientists. So, merely show us the experiments and we'll be better to agree or not with their hypothesis.. See, you have failed in every forum thread to present that. Repeating past mumbo jumbo is meh!!!So, we have a whole bunch of flap-yappers claiming degrees, then stating that they know more about science than the scientists. Yet we see from their posts that they are bone ignorant of science. Like ol' Billy Boob with his excited molecules from the sun.
Well, kiddies, this is how it is. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. As the consequences of the warming become increasing apparent, their are people that are going to be held accountable for their lies. And that accounting will be political and economic. And not to your liking.
Yeah they showed us charts with CO2 but no temperature axis. How can you not be convinced???
