No I'm not. But it's good idea. You guys need to be drowned out. Or just plain drowned. The future earth will thank us. You suck and you lie and you know it.
Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
No I'm not. But it's good idea. You guys need to be drowned out. Or just plain drowned. The future earth will thank us. You suck and you lie and you know it.
Skeptical Science - Funded by Al Gore's Climate Reality Project and GIM hedge fund[
http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/09/skeptical-science-partnership-with-al.html
http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/09/skeptical-science-partnership-with-al.html
So let's get this straight - you ARE NOT denying that you are part of Skeptical Science's "crusher crew" who sole intent is to "drown out" those who do not accept their alarmist positions.
Correct? State it in very direct terms so when we fact check it - we will have you on record.
These alarmist assholes in general are a bunch of lying criminals. In the case of GW they dress their crimes up with the trappings of science.
I have a friend that got frontal lobe lesions from Black Mold in a mattress. She is able to find alarmist garbage about Fukushima and cell tower radiation but she is unable to do the due diligence required to sort it all out. I was trying to sort it out for her and found that the web is saturated with alarmist [mis]information that makes it hard to find actual data. Meanwhile she just can't shut up about this shit and drives people nuts so she's a walking talking free advertiser for these jerkoffs that can generate political capital out of thin air with alarmist bullshit stories wrapped in fake science. I found a story about Fukushima that alleged the author had sailed the Pacific from Japan to California and observed whales with giant tumors and an ocean completely devoid of life! Once I had the data in hand it was very easy to conclude that the authors were taking every shred of data and misrepresenting it in a way that would alarm people. So how much happiness are these bastards willing to destroy to play their game? All of it! My friend is unhappy and anxiety ridden because they can play her like a fiddle. She calls me at 5am with hysteria about where is she supposed to move to survive and how can she convince her family to go along.
Our schools don't teach much critical thinking. If they did, people would be able to separate out information [what somebody makes of data] from data and they would be a lot less inclined towards alarmist bullshit.
Environmentalists lost me about forty years ago when I read an article that stated that we were losing "hundreds of thousands of species every hour" or something to that effect. Marxists can ride this environmental shit like nobody else. It gives them control over private property and it generates an excuse to give the UN taxation power. They can't stop with the lies.. futurecurrents probably creams his jeans at the thought of the perfect society based on environmentalism...
I have a friend that got frontal lobe lesions from Black Mold in a mattress. She is able to find alarmist garbage about Fukushima and cell tower radiation but she is unable to do the due diligence required to sort it all out. I was trying to sort it out for her and found that the web is saturated with alarmist [mis]information that makes it hard to find actual data. Meanwhile she just can't shut up about this shit and drives people nuts so she's a walking talking free advertiser for these jerkoffs that can generate political capital out of thin air with alarmist bullshit stories wrapped in fake science. I found a story about Fukushima that alleged the author had sailed the Pacific from Japan to California and observed whales with giant tumors and an ocean completely devoid of life! Once I had the data in hand it was very easy to conclude that the authors were taking every shred of data and misrepresenting it in a way that would alarm people. So how much happiness are these bastards willing to destroy to play their game? All of it! My friend is unhappy and anxiety ridden because they can play her like a fiddle. She calls me at 5am with hysteria about where is she supposed to move to survive and how can she convince her family to go along.
Our schools don't teach much critical thinking. If they did, people would be able to separate out information [what somebody makes of data] from data and they would be a lot less inclined towards alarmist bullshit.
Environmentalists lost me about forty years ago when I read an article that stated that we were losing "hundreds of thousands of species every hour" or something to that effect. Marxists can ride this environmental shit like nobody else. It gives them control over private property and it generates an excuse to give the UN taxation power. They can't stop with the lies.. futurecurrents probably creams his jeans at the thought of the perfect society based on environmentalism...
There are threats facing the oceans. These threats include over-fishing and localized pollution.
Global warming is not a threat to the oceans.
this is a repeat from me... but it is the state of science.
so when fc repeats his crap... I will repeat the truth...
since co2 is such a small percent of the greenhouse.
agw nutter / speculators have stated adding co2 causes more clouds. their theory was more clouds means more warming...
but....
Science is still investigating what happens when ghcs are added.
the theory had been / is more co2 produces more clouds.
http://climatekids.nasa.gov/greenhouse-effect/
Don't clouds keep Earth cooler?
Water in the atmosphere also acts as a greenhouse gas. The atmosphere contains a lot of water. This water can be in the form of a gasâwater vaporâor in the form of a liquidâclouds. Clouds are water vapor that has cooled and condensed back into tiny droplets of liquid water.
Clouds as seen from space.
Earth's clouds as seen from space.
Water in the clouds holds in some of the heat from Earth's surface. But the bright white tops of clouds also reflect some of the sunlight back to space. So with clouds, some energy from the Sun never even reaches Earth's surface.
How much the clouds affect the warming or cooling of Earth's surface is one of those tricky questions that several NASA missions are aiming to answer. [/B][/QUOTE]
so when fc repeats his crap... I will repeat the truth...
since co2 is such a small percent of the greenhouse.
agw nutter / speculators have stated adding co2 causes more clouds. their theory was more clouds means more warming...
but....
Science is still investigating what happens when ghcs are added.
the theory had been / is more co2 produces more clouds.
http://climatekids.nasa.gov/greenhouse-effect/
Don't clouds keep Earth cooler?
Water in the atmosphere also acts as a greenhouse gas. The atmosphere contains a lot of water. This water can be in the form of a gasâwater vaporâor in the form of a liquidâclouds. Clouds are water vapor that has cooled and condensed back into tiny droplets of liquid water.
Clouds as seen from space.
Earth's clouds as seen from space.
Water in the clouds holds in some of the heat from Earth's surface. But the bright white tops of clouds also reflect some of the sunlight back to space. So with clouds, some energy from the Sun never even reaches Earth's surface.
How much the clouds affect the warming or cooling of Earth's surface is one of those tricky questions that several NASA missions are aiming to answer. [/B][/QUOTE]