Search results

Total lie and fraud. Ridiculous. Absurd. A fucking lie. So of course you think it is great. Are you going to deny that you DO actually believe in AGW?

The sad thing is that jerm actually does believe that man has caused significant global warming. He is just arguing against it because of his insane ideology.

The Self-Ratings As an independent test of the measured consensus, we also emailed over 8,500 authors and asked them to rate their own papers using our same categories. The most appropriate expert to rate the level of endorsement of a published paper is the author of the paper, after all...

Bonafide scientific papers rejecting the consensus There are some papers that conduct original research and reject the consensus. It's useful to look at the actual arguments they present to reject AGW: Shaviv 2005 claims cosmic rays are causing global warming. While the link between cosmic...

Hey asshole.... The scientific authors of the papers were also contacted and asked to rate their own papers, and over 97% whose papers took a position on the cause said humans are causing global warming.

And why should there not be total consensus. The science is obvious and common sense. Only idiot denialists refuse to see it.

No jerm, it really is a 97% consensus and it really is true that essentially every science organization in the world agree. This is true regardless of your insanity.

So what, this is the more relevant chart. Your chart is shit.

I wouldn't bet on it. Especially leap who is so stupid it's comical. The smartest idiot among them is jem who has somehow subjugated his intellect with ideology and gets some perverse pleasure out of arguing the most irrational viewpoint.

Yes douchebag, CO2 stopped being a greenhouse gas the entire world's science community is wrong but you are right. You're such an asshole.

Yes douchebag, CO2 stopped being a greenhouse gas the entire world's science community is wrong but you are right. You're such an asshole.

No, the burden of proof is on you to show that somehow two hundred years of climate science is wrong and that CO2 does NOT cause warming and that virtually the entire world's science community is wrong about a common sense thing that a ten year old can understand. But righties can't for some...

I agree. I was a member of Greenpeace but canceled membership when they started focusing on the feel-good things but what I felt were unimportant things like whale hunting. Nuclear needs to be pushed and is one of the best ways to go. Some of these causes are meant to pull the heart...

Nearly 25 years to the day after the Exxon Valdez supertanker ran aground in Alaska, spewing 260,000 barrels of crude oil, Exxon has agreed to report to investors on how climate change will affect its core business model, including the prospect that major portions of its oil reserves may need to...

I knew you wouldn't disappoint.

Here's another chance to look like a fool. Read this and then say there is no science. Just one more time. http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect-advanced.htm

1)Oreskes found that out of all the papers on climate science between 1993 and 2003 that not a single one rejected the consensus position. 2) Doran in 2009 found that 97.5% of climatologists who actively publish research on climate change responded yes. ..... "Do you think human activity is a...

1)Oreskes found that out of all the papers on climate science between 1993 and 2003 that not a single one rejected the consensus position. 2) Doran in 2009 found that 97.5% of climatologists who actively publish research on climate change responded yes. ..... "Do you think human activity is a...

Yes, and up is actually down. Deluded ideologically deranged douchebag.

No they have not. Not at all. Only in your fucked up deluded mind. 1)Oreskes found that out of all the papers on climate science between 1993 and 2003 that not a single one rejected the consensus position. 2) Doran in 2009 found that 97.5% of climatologists who actively publish research...