It's a distraction. You're either going ad hominem by calling him a hypocrite, whether you believe there are even greenhouse gases or not, or you are (like all of us), making the same devil's bargain when you use products that contribute to the pollution of, in your case, the waters around San Diego.
Say goodbye to barrier beaches and coastal salt marshes
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
If an individual forcefully preaches the value of life everyday and then goes to work daily as a member of a firing squad then this person would be a hypocrite.
Likewise if a zealot preaches that man-made greenhouse gases is causing the earth's temperature to dangerously rise while selling the most concentrated of these gasses each day is a hypocrite.
Indeed. But if he's the guy on the firing squad who's been given the blank round (as in, greenhouse gases aren't doing anything), then who cares? Calling him hypocrite is just a distraction.
Again, piezoe says very foolish things about AGW.......
Polls show that many members of the public believe that scientists substantially disagree about human-caused global warming. The gold standard of science is the peer-reviewed literature. If there is disagreement among scientists, based not on opinion but on hard evidence, it will be found in the peer-reviewed literature.
I searched the Web of Science for peer-reviewed scientific articles published between 1 January 1991 and 9 November 2012 that have the keyword phrases “global warming” or “global climate change.” The search produced 13,950 articles. See methodology.
By my definition, 24 of the 13,950 articles, 0.17% or 1 in 581, clearly reject global warming or endorse a cause other thanCO2 emissions for observed warming. The list of articles that reject global warming is here. The 24 articles have been cited a total of 113 times over the nearly 21-year period, for an average of close to 5 citations each. That compares to an average of about 19 citations for articles answering to “global warming,” for example. Four of the rejecting articles have never been cited; four have citations in the double-digits. The most-cited has 17.
Of one thing we can be certain: had any of these articles presented the magic bullet that falsifies human-caused global warming, that article would be on its way to becoming one of the most-cited in the history of science.
http://desmogblog.com/2012/11/15/why-climate-deniers-have-no-credibility-science-one-pie-chart
My name is futurecurrents. I enjoy posting the same nonsense over and over again, and never learning.
ricter... I tend to point it out when he starts attacking the character of those who do not agree with his bullshit. Who the hell is he to question anyone's morals on this subject, he is by his own viewpoint an eco terrorist.
you saying according to us he is shooting blanks is different subject.
you saying according to us he is shooting blanks is different subject.
My "bullshit" is the same "bullshit" as virtually every climate science expert in the world believes. I merely am repeating it. You, on the other hand, spew lies and disinformation that confuses people like loyek. You sir are a vile crazed immoral liar who would sacrifice the future for your own selfish gains. You and your kind truly disgust me. How you can consider yourself a good Christian is a mystery.
I am an environmentalist you moron. I try to conserve. I volunteered my time to clean water causes. Yet you an eco terrorist who sells a greenhouse gas 2000 times more power than co2 attempts to take the high moral ground when we point out there is no science showing man made co2 is causing warming and ask for the science?
Do you know what a greenhouse gas is? Do you sell and install one that is 2000 times more powerful than co2. If you do, then shut the fuck up about our morals you are the eco terrorist here.
If you are concerned about confusion.... stop lying about the science and say that there is a risk man made co2 causes warming and we advocate a cautious conservative approach. Stop lying about the state of science to push your big govt anti liberty cause. If we let you and al gore types have there way goldman sachs will own an exchange that essentially limits the output of a children's children. They will have to have permission to drive to work and make or create things.
Do you know what a greenhouse gas is? Do you sell and install one that is 2000 times more powerful than co2. If you do, then shut the fuck up about our morals you are the eco terrorist here.
If you are concerned about confusion.... stop lying about the science and say that there is a risk man made co2 causes warming and we advocate a cautious conservative approach. Stop lying about the state of science to push your big govt anti liberty cause. If we let you and al gore types have there way goldman sachs will own an exchange that essentially limits the output of a children's children. They will have to have permission to drive to work and make or create things.
If futurecurrents posted new material and actually intellectually debated the merits of "climate change" then his participation would be worthwhile. Unfortunately as a zealot, he merely reposts the same exact nonsense over & over -- several hundred times in many cases -- while calling others obscene names and adding no intellectual benefit to the conversation. His sole objective as crusher crew member is to "drown out" the opposition while posting a continuous stream of nonsense as dictated by his collaborators.