Something the Dog Said wrote: But haters have to hate, even when they spout false information.
Is it questioning the validity of global warming or pictures of his cat that make him a "hater"?
Serial posting of dubious cut and paste right wing blogs without any attempt to verify the validity of the information in order to vilify the science based evidence does render one a hater.
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
Something the Dog Said wrote: typical of Bob and his serial cut and pasting of bogus information. Apparently all that it takes to contradict 97% of environmental scientists is an op ed by a fossil fuel lobbyist and pictures of Bob's cat. But then that is what is to be expected from him.
As to Fred and his typical nonsense, since we are in a period of "global cooling", why have 15 of the last 17 years been the hottest on record?
But haters have to hate, even when they spout false information.
Talk about a hypocrite... who's hating in this thread again?
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
Something the Dog Said wrote: typical of Bob and his serial cut and pasting of bogus information. Apparently all that it takes to contradict 97% of environmental scientists is an op ed by a fossil fuel lobbyist and pictures of Bob's cat. But then that is what is to be expected from him.
As to Fred and his typical nonsense, since we are in a period of "global cooling", why have 15 of the last 17 years been the hottest on record?
But haters have to hate, even when they spout false information.
Talk about a hypocrite... who's hating in this thread again?
You are right, I hate false information, lies, ignorance, particularly when it is used to discredit scientific evidence in order to harm mankind.
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
Something the Dog Said wrote: But haters have to hate, even when they spout false information.
Is it questioning the validity of global warming or pictures of his cat that make him a "hater"?
Serial posting of dubious cut and paste right wing blogs without any attempt to verify the validity of the information in order to vilify the science based evidence does render one a hater.
If not a hater, then intellectually dishonest? Ignorant? Idiotic? Or simply a tool?
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
LOL wrote: And I thought we were just racists? Now its haters too. LOL
Nice to see you back STDS! Keep up the cheery posting.
HAPPY FESTIVUS!
So you are ok with the spreading of false information as long as it is done in a "cheery" tone? Right.
Now you have to play the race card to make out that you are a "victim" in order to deflect from the use of false information to discredit scientific evidence.
typical.
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
The Earth heats and cools for a lot of different reasons wheras most of the evidence for higher temps comes from the carbon hater crowd.
If the Earth and Sol are going through a dustier part of the universe, the amount of sunlight that reaches us will be diminished. Or if the sun isn't burning as strong for one reason or another, the Earth is likely to cool too.
So the climate change people are being ignorant to think everything will remain constant except for CO2 levels.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
OmniScience wrote: Global temps have been mostly flat for the last 17 years. If there were a direct correlation between CO2 and temps it would have been much warmer as China and the EU (with their wonderful cap and trade system) have increased their emissions.
Don't worry SC, the CO2 scare isn't ending anytime soon, there is way too much money and power behind it. Carbon trading is now nearly a €88.7 billion industry. That doesn't include the billions available to academia for researching global warming.
Gotta go feed the woodstove again, not enough global warming near my place.
False statement. Global temps have not been mostly flat for the last 17 years. Some skeptics claim that global "surface" temps have been flat for last 17 years. But when one examines that statement, two things pop out. Why just focus on surface temps? Because deep ocean temps have increased considerably during that time, acting as temporary heat sink to absorb the increasing global warming. That is cyclical and the surface temps will soon be increasing.
Second, why focus on 17 years? That seems to be an odd periodic frequency. Why not 10 years, 20 years, or 100 years? Because 17 years ago the earth endured an unusually warm year. Temperatures since then have not decreased but have increased slightly or maintained at that high temperature as evidenced by 15 of those years being the warmest in recorded history. If one was to choose a different time interval, one would see an increase in global warming.
But instead we get this nonsense about "global cooling" of which there is no credible scientific evidence. We also get the intellectual dishonesty of those spouting this nonsense and using opeds by fossil fuel lobbyists as their "scientific evidence".
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
Al Gore used a hockey stick, or should I say hokey stick, so if you were willing to accept his numbers that proved to be false, why can't we craft our data too?
Or Dog, are you going to maintain that Al Gore's model is accurate and temperature rises are still moving just as fast as he predicted?
It is like crying wolf, he presented a catastrophic model that proved false and now you expect us to beleive it this time.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
