Why is it?

[mamooth]

The lying just never stops with you does it hairball?...Of course no one would expect any different from you. And while I am not interested enough to go through your lies this time item by item, I will point out some of the most egregious ones.. For example

Go on, keep on crying about how I busted you for fraud again, my sweet little fraud-bitch. Your tears of bitter whiny loserdom are like a sweet nectar.

Agee, 1980
(5)Predicts warming.

[Agee, 1980]
Evidence has been presented and discussed to show a cooling trend over the Northern Hemisphere since around 1940, amounting to over 0.5°C,

Hey liar, why didn't you go to the end to the paper and look at the conclusions? Here, let me post what you deliberately left out, as you hoped nobody would check up on you.

"This warming could be even more dramatic, considering the likely prospect for CO2 warming".

The paper very clearly predicts warming. You lied big by saying it predicted cooling. That fact is not disputable. You're an open fraud.

It didn't have to end like this, you know, with your credibility zeroed out, with everyone convinced that you lie about everything. You could have just said "Yes, mamooth, you're right. I didn't read any of those sources. I just parroted a list from a website, and I believed my cult masters when they said they all predicted cooling. I'll know better now than to trust any denier source. Thank you for setting me straight." But no. You decided to keep on digging deeper into your liar-hole, and now you're down in a septic tank.

A paper from the national academy of sciences is not a scientific paper...what an idiot...:

Scientific papers go through peer review boards. What you had is a called a magazine article, or a report by a single CIA monkey trying to make a name by alarming the boss.

This should be enough evidence that you continue to be one of the 3 worst liars on the board hairball...

I see you're not going to even try to explain why you so proudly lied about the other 16 papers I checked. You pretended they predicted cooling, when they either made no predictions or predicted warming.

Be assured that everyone understands why you're running. Fraud on the scale that you've attempted can't be defended in any way. Being that honesty is out of the question for you, you have no choice but to cry, pout, scream, and hurl yourself into the gutter. Well done. <golf clap>

 

[JoeB131]

It is like liberals saying that the Polar Vortex of North America didn't count for global warming because it is only 14% of the rest of the earth. Then liberals started showing how 1 side of Antarctic sea ice was melting because of global warming and it was found out this..

Uh, guy, we've had volcanoes for thousands of years... it still doesn't explain why polar ice is melting at an alarming rate.

 

[JoeB131]

Spoken like the idiot you are...but then I never really expected much more from the likes of you...you showed what you were made of the first time you tried to dodge your inability to provide the sort of evidence I asked for.

Guy, I don't waste time on shit like that. Just like I don't bother to show pictures of concentration camps to our resident holocaust deniers...

You retards are evidence immune.

 

[JoeB131]

what is it we're supposedly paranoid about? I mean you're paranoid that the world will act like a vacuum and suck your ass into some void cause of CO2. Dude, now that is paranoia times ten. So instead bubba, it is you that is paranoid. Just so we're all clear.

Well, except I never said anything about a vacuum. I said- and listen closely- that climate change will cause undesirable changes in the environment that will impact our ability to live- droughts, famines, flooding- that we are ALREADY seeing.

Oh, and you didn't post the quote from SSDD of the word you accused him of writing, so until that happens, you're again a liar.

Uh, no, you see, he said he was a "Critical thinker", and I told him he spelled "Retard" wrong.

 

[jc456]

what is it we're supposedly paranoid about? I mean you're paranoid that the world will act like a vacuum and suck your ass into some void cause of CO2. Dude, now that is paranoia times ten. So instead bubba, it is you that is paranoid. Just so we're all clear.

Well, except I never said anything about a vacuum. I said- and listen closely- that climate change will cause undesirable changes in the environment that will impact our ability to live- droughts, famines, flooding- that we are ALREADY seeing.

Oh, and you didn't post the quote from SSDD of the word you accused him of writing, so until that happens, you're again a liar.

Uh, no, you see, he said he was a "Critical thinker", and I told him he spelled "Retard" wrong.

dude, sorry, I asked you what i'm paranoid about. you again wrote what it is that you are paranoid about. Not mine. hmmmmmmmmmm

And BTW, you're so paranoid you act like you're ready to commit harry cary.

But first, you should perhaps investigate more and see that your paranoia is unwarranted and there due to a lie by the MSM. where is ice melting today. got anywhere?

 

[JoeB131]

dude, sorry, I asked you what i'm paranoid about. you again wrote what it is that you are paranoid about. Not mine. hmmmmmmmmmm

And BTW, you're so paranoid you act like you're ready to commit harry cary.

But first, you should perhaps investigate more and see that your paranoia is unwarranted and there due to a lie by the MSM. where is ice melting today. got anywhere?

It's not paranoid if it's a valid concern.

paranoid is saying, "The MSM must be in on a conspiracy if they say things I don't want to hear."

And this is the problem with you deniers. You don't want AGW to be true because it would require you to change your lifestyle (or be compelled to change your lifestyle.)

Whereas a rational person says, "Okay, we know this is happening, what is an appropriate response?"

 

[SSDD]

Go on, keep on crying about how I busted you for fraud again, my sweet little fraud-bitch. Your tears of bitter whiny loserdom are like a sweet nectar.

Poor stupid old woman....seems that the papers...all of them show concern over the cooling of the time...and as to the papers on particulates...science was grasping about looking for a reason for the cooling.....and perhaps a way to stop it... sorry this all so far over your head...but alas, the cooling scare was real...and hundreds of papers bear that out... no amount of your whining or lashing out will change it....

 

[SSDD]

Guy, I don't waste time on shit like that. Just like I don't bother to show pictures of concentration camps to our resident holocaust deniers...

And the dodge continues...if there was any actual observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence, guys like you would be throwing it out all the time...it would be unavoidable...and you would take every opportunity to make skeptics your bitch with it...instead of being reduced to being the bitch because you can't come up with the first bit of actual evidence to support your belief...

You retards are evidence immune.

I love the impotent name calling...we keep asking, because evidence is what convinces us...and lack of evidence is pretty convincing as well...all you have is name calling...and for the hundreds and thousands of billions of dollars that have been flushed down the AGW toilet, you still don't have the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence to support the claim that man is altering the global climate....pathetic

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

dude, sorry, I asked you what i'm paranoid about. you again wrote what it is that you are paranoid about. Not mine. hmmmmmmmmmm

And BTW, you're so paranoid you act like you're ready to commit harry cary.

But first, you should perhaps investigate more and see that your paranoia is unwarranted and there due to a lie by the MSM. where is ice melting today. got anywhere?

It's not paranoid if it's a valid concern.

paranoid is saying, "The MSM must be in on a conspiracy if they say things I don't want to hear."

And this is the problem with you deniers. You don't want AGW to be true because it would require you to change your lifestyle (or be compelled to change your lifestyle.)

Whereas a rational person says, "Okay, we know this is happening, what is an appropriate response?"

Lets see, so if FREE people don't do what you want, then you want the government to FORCE them to comply? Fascist Joe, Seig Heil?
Okay we know what is happening since 2000, the planet still hasn't burned up in those 10 years, so what is the appropriate response 100 years from now?
Even when people try to do right, liberals never can be happy, so they screw over everyone for those dollars that belong to the state.

New tax bill takes aim at hybrid car drivers

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A controversial bill to replace California’s gas tax is gaining momentum across the state.
Senate Bill 1077 proposes for drivers to pay tax per each mile they drive instead of state taxes applied per gallon at the pump.

The only way to eliminate Global Warming is to throw all the GW zelots into the bottom of the ocean. Then there is no more man made climate change, only climate change. Bunch of dumbasses who vote Dumbocrat.

 

[SSDD]

It's not paranoid if it's a valid concern.

Except that it isn't a valid concern...it is a non problem....the claims aren't supported by the first piece of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence. It is a sham...perpetrated by people who know it is a sham...and the only people who believe are what climate science likes to call useful idiots.

Whereas a rational person says, "Okay, we know this is happening, what is an appropriate response?"

A rational person only says "OK, we know this is happening" if there is sufficient actual evidence to support the statement...there isn't ...in fact there is not a single shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in the whole world that supports the anthropogenic component of the AGW hypothesis...not one....

 

[Dale Smith]

First...I never used the word...Second, I don't think you are retarded...I think you are stupid and a dupe as evidenced by your belief in AGW without the first bit of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in support of the hypothesis.

No, guy when you claimed to be a critical thinker, you spelled critical retard wrong. Sorry you weren't clear on it.

"Doy, I know better than 95% of Climate scientists because I read something on the internet. Doy. Corky Smart."

"We"??? Your ass will be cowering behind a couch hoping that your beloved "gubermint" protects you because you are compliant. You, my leftard friend, are a gutless, cowardly piece of shit.

Naw, I was just having a little fun at the expense of paranoid loons. The sad part is you do take that kind of talk seriously.

Unfortunately, you come across as a clueless moron.

 

[jc456]

dude, sorry, I asked you what i'm paranoid about. you again wrote what it is that you are paranoid about. Not mine. hmmmmmmmmmm

And BTW, you're so paranoid you act like you're ready to commit harry cary.

But first, you should perhaps investigate more and see that your paranoia is unwarranted and there due to a lie by the MSM. where is ice melting today. got anywhere?

It's not paranoid if it's a valid concern.

paranoid is saying, "The MSM must be in on a conspiracy if they say things I don't want to hear."

And this is the problem with you deniers. You don't want AGW to be true because it would require you to change your lifestyle (or be compelled to change your lifestyle.)

Whereas a rational person says, "Okay, we know this is happening, what is an appropriate response?"

the fact that you can't defend what you're concerned with becomes my problem how? I don't have to agree with you! Who do you think you are that you get to make that assertion? Let me take a moment and laugh at your insanity.

 

[JoeB131]

And the dodge continues...if there was any actual observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence, guys like you would be throwing it out all the time...

Well, they do... but you deniers keep claiming they don't.

Which is why it's largely a waste of time talking to you.

Except that it isn't a valid concern...it is a non problem....the claims aren't supported by the first piece of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence. It is a sham...perpetrated by people who know it is a sham...and the only people who believe are what climate science likes to call useful idiots.

right, so 95% of climate scientists are all in on a conspiracy to fool us into getting the pittance we spend on this subject. Because clearly guys smart enough to earn doctorates have no other way to make money.

 

[JoeB131]

the fact that you can't defend what you're concerned with becomes my problem how? I don't have to agree with you! Who do you think you are that you get to make that assertion? Let me take a moment and laugh at your insanity.

right. Because clearly denying a problem solves it. Just pretend it isn't there....

Nope, nothing to see here...

Nothing to see here...

 

[SSDD]

And the dodge continues...if there was any actual observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence, guys like you would be throwing it out all the time...

Well, they do... but you deniers keep claiming they don't.

Well they don't...but you warmer wackos keep claiming that they do...and if you could find any, you would like nothing more than to slap me down with some....pretending that you can't be bothered to prove that you are right is about the stupidest dodge possible...you come here to discuss the issue explicitly to prove that you are right...but now, you have been challenged to not show an overwhelming mountain of data...but just one piece of observed, measured, quantified, empirical data supporting the claim that man is altering the global climate with his CO2....and you can't do it... You have become laughing stock.

Which is why it's largely a waste of time talking to you.

Lucky for me you hear your mom calling you for dinner....says the playground bully....it has become more than obvious to anyone looking that you have been caught off guard....you believed there was such evidence and now you find that there isn't...so you pretend boredom...what a laugh.

right, so 95% of climate scientists are all in on a conspiracy to fool us into getting the pittance we spend on this subject. Because clearly guys smart enough to earn doctorates have no other way to make money.

You claim that 95% of all scientists agree that man is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions...such a consensus should be supported by a literal mountain of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence...and yet, you can't find a single piece....looking back through history, you know what else creates consensus even more effectively than hard evidence?....a big old bucket full of money...which is precisely what is flowing into climate science these days.

 

[SSDD]

the fact that you can't defend what you're concerned with becomes my problem how? I don't have to agree with you! Who do you think you are that you get to make that assertion? Let me take a moment and laugh at your insanity.

right. Because clearly denying a problem solves it. Just pretend it isn't there....

Nope, nothing to see here...

Nothing to see here...

Are you claiming that floods never happened? Or that glaciers never melted?...Take a peek into history...about 15000 years ago, the great lakes were under a mile of ice...No one is arguing with you that the climate doesn't change...the question is whether man is responsible...You claim that there is observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence to support the claim....lets see just one piece of it?

 

[Crick]

The things he is showing you in those photos have NOT happened within human history and they have probably not happened at that rate for the last 65 million years.

 

[JoeB131]

Well they don't...but you warmer wackos keep claiming that they do...and if you could find any, you would like nothing more than to slap me down with some...

Guy, I'm not having a conversation with you about all the evidence you are willfully ignoring.

Are you claiming that floods never happened? Or that glaciers never melted?...Take a peek into history...about 15000 years ago, the great lakes were under a mile of ice...No one is arguing with you that the climate doesn't change...

Um, yeah, but it took THOUSANDS of years for that to happen, not decades.

Such as that one glacier in the second picture vanished in less than 60 years. That's what you nutters don't get... this is happening a lot faster than the planet and life forms that don't live in climate controlled boxes can adapt to.

 

[jc456]

Well they don't...but you warmer wackos keep claiming that they do...and if you could find any, you would like nothing more than to slap me down with some...

Guy, I'm not having a conversation with you about all the evidence you are willfully ignoring.

Are you claiming that floods never happened? Or that glaciers never melted?...Take a peek into history...about 15000 years ago, the great lakes were under a mile of ice...No one is arguing with you that the climate doesn't change...

Um, yeah, but it took THOUSANDS of years for that to happen, not decades.

Such as that one glacier in the second picture vanished in less than 60 years. That's what you nutters don't get... this is happening a lot faster than the planet and life forms that don't live in climate controlled boxes can adapt to.

What evidence is that?

 

[JoeB131]

What evidence is that?

The evidence you ignore because you don't want it to be true.