BREAKING!! Michael Mann.....climate criminal?

[CrusaderFrank]

Data, schmatta, all we know for certain is that the USA use of "Fossil fuels" is melting the ice caps and must be stopped

 

[mamooth]

Frank has a sad. He was born in the wrong era. If he'd lived in communist East Germany, he could have turned in his neighbors, family, various scientists, and anyone who didn't agree with TheParty.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank has a sad. He was born in the wrong era. If he'd lived in communist East Germany, he could have turned in his neighbors, family, various scientists, and anyone who didn't agree with TheParty.

^ Denier!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Check it out, some more Mann Derangement Syndrome from the loonies. Conspiracy kookery is literally all they have left.

I would ask the kooks if it bothers them that the whole planet is laughing at them, but there's no need. It clearly does bother them, a lot.

Fuck off, Warmer

Is he any relation to Dean Warmer?

I have Peer Reviewed this post and find it 100% Awesome

 

[HelenaHandbag]

This secretly-taped video of a denialist political cult meeting illustrates their daily TwoMinutesHate directed at Mann. The rank-and-file denialists all understand how they're being watched and judged by their party leaders, hence none of them will skimp on the hate.

Orwell 2 Minutes of Hate - YouTube

Hope you weren't late to today's session!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How's that AGWCult doing in India and China

Sent from my Chinese Supercomputer made from XBox parts Bush sent to China

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Fuck off, Warmer

Is he any relation to Dean Warmer?

I have Peer Reviewed this post and find it 100% Awesome

Where do I sign up to be one of these peers who get to do some reviewing?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Is he any relation to Dean Warmer?

I have Peer Reviewed this post and find it 100% Awesome

Where do I sign up to be one of these peers who get to do some reviewing?

You just did! We have consensus, the science is settled. It's Miller time!

Sent from my Chinese Supercomputer made from XBox parts Bush sent to China

 

[Abraham3]

Cooks ’97% consensus’ disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors

“0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%”

Cooks ?97% consensus? disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors | Watts Up With That?

Obviously, the 97% figure is a bogus number perpetuated by the religion. But that's why we have a forum like this.......to expose the bogusness of the hoax.

I knew someone would bring up Legates. Well, 0.3%. The IPCC must have used every single one of them to produce AR5. How was that done? Do you think they've got all their names on a list? I guess I have to give up. There is no consensus supporting the validity of AGW. The 99.7% of climate scientists think there's no Greenhouse Effect, think there's no global warming and think the IPCC is just flat out wrong, wrong, wrong. Right?

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

 

[ScienceRocks]

If it was .3% then why is every text book in atmospheric science model the green house effect after a sorry .3% opinion. If I am full of crap then please post a modern text book showing your thinking...

Weird...The publishers and professors teaching our children must all be crooks and frauds.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Not to say that the publishers aren't crooks in other ways $ $ $

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Cooks ’97% consensus’ disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors

“0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%”

Cooks ?97% consensus? disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors | Watts Up With That?

Obviously, the 97% figure is a bogus number perpetuated by the religion. But that's why we have a forum like this.......to expose the bogusness of the hoax.

I knew someone would bring up Legates. Well, 0.3%. The IPCC must have used every single one of them to produce AR5. How was that done? Do you think they've got all their names on a list? I guess I have to give up. There is no consensus supporting the validity of AGW. The 99.7% of climate scientists think there's no Greenhouse Effect, think there's no global warming and think the IPCC is just flat out wrong, wrong, wrong. Right?

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

There was consensus the world was a flat plane held up on the back of a giant turtle and that made more sense that the AGWCult Theory

 

[ScienceRocks]

Cooks ’97% consensus’ disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors

“0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%”

Cooks ?97% consensus? disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors | Watts Up With That?

Obviously, the 97% figure is a bogus number perpetuated by the religion. But that's why we have a forum like this.......to expose the bogusness of the hoax.

I knew someone would bring up Legates. Well, 0.3%. The IPCC must have used every single one of them to produce AR5. How was that done? Do you think they've got all their names on a list? I guess I have to give up. There is no consensus supporting the validity of AGW. The 99.7% of climate scientists think there's no Greenhouse Effect, think there's no global warming and think the IPCC is just flat out wrong, wrong, wrong. Right?

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

There was consensus the world was a flat plane held up on the back of a giant turtle and that made more sense that the AGWCult Theory

Developed by camp fire bs the natives told their children about They didn't do studies and research more into it. That's something the greeks started to do and is a major reason why western civilization leads the world.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I knew someone would bring up Legates. Well, 0.3%. The IPCC must have used every single one of them to produce AR5. How was that done? Do you think they've got all their names on a list? I guess I have to give up. There is no consensus supporting the validity of AGW. The 99.7% of climate scientists think there's no Greenhouse Effect, think there's no global warming and think the IPCC is just flat out wrong, wrong, wrong. Right?

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

There was consensus the world was a flat plane held up on the back of a giant turtle and that made more sense that the AGWCult Theory

Developed by camp fire bs the natives told their children about They didn't do studies and research more into it. That's something the greeks started to do and is a major reason why western civilization leads the world.

Yeah, keep citing Tyndall. Done at the same time as Phrenology was the rage and accuracy out in the 1,000's column

Tyndall proved Global Warming!!

 

[SSDD]

Cooks ’97% consensus’ disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors

“0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%”

Cooks ?97% consensus? disproven by a new peer reviewed paper showing major math errors | Watts Up With That?

Obviously, the 97% figure is a bogus number perpetuated by the religion. But that's why we have a forum like this.......to expose the bogusness of the hoax.

I knew someone would bring up Legates. Well, 0.3%. The IPCC must have used every single one of them to produce AR5. How was that done? Do you think they've got all their names on a list? I guess I have to give up. There is no consensus supporting the validity of AGW. The 99.7% of climate scientists think there's no Greenhouse Effect, think there's no global warming and think the IPCC is just flat out wrong, wrong, wrong. Right?

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

There was consensus the world was a flat plane held up on the back of a giant turtle and that made more sense that the AGWCult Theory

Take away the turtle, move the earth 4 times further away from the sun, and eliminate day and night and replace it with a weak twilight and you have the sort of earth that you find in modern GCMs. The reality is that the camp fire sitters in the dim past had a more accurate idea of what the earth is really like than modern GCM modellers...after all, what is a turtle or two among friends?

 

[Abraham3]

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

Would you care to take a shot at answering these queries Mr Frank?

 

[SSDD]

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

Would you care to take a shot at answering these queries Mr Frank?

Why don't you explain, using the greenhouse hypothesis as described by climate science, why the base of the troposphere on Uranus is 33K warmer than the base of the troposphere on earth even though Uranus is 30X further away from the sun than earth and has an atmosphere composed almost entirely of hydrogen and helium.

and while you are at it, explain why the surface temperature of Venus does not drop during its 2,000 hour night...also using the greenhouse hypothesis as described by climate science.

 

[IanC]

Hahahaha. Did you have a stroke?

 

[mamooth]

Why don't you explain, using the greenhouse hypothesis as described by climate science, why the base of the troposphere on Uranus is 33K warmer than the base of the troposphere on earth even though Uranus is 30X further away from the sun than earth and has an atmosphere composed almost entirely of hydrogen and helium.

So what's the source of these kook conspiracy theories of yours?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I knew someone would bring up Legates. Well, 0.3%. The IPCC must have used every single one of them to produce AR5. How was that done? Do you think they've got all their names on a list? I guess I have to give up. There is no consensus supporting the validity of AGW. The 99.7% of climate scientists think there's no Greenhouse Effect, think there's no global warming and think the IPCC is just flat out wrong, wrong, wrong. Right?

Well, no. That's not what Legate measured, is it. Why don't you be a good little boy Skookie-lad and tell us EXACTLY what "math errors" Legate found and EXACTLY what Legate actually measured among Cook's set of studies? WHAT characteristic do the 0.3% have in common?

There was consensus the world was a flat plane held up on the back of a giant turtle and that made more sense that the AGWCult Theory

Take away the turtle, move the earth 4 times further away from the sun, and eliminate day and night and replace it with a weak twilight and you have the sort of earth that you find in modern GCMs. The reality is that the camp fire sitters in the dim past had a more accurate idea of what the earth is really like than modern GCM modellers...after all, what is a turtle or two among friends?

The Campfire sitters are the same one who built Stonehenge so they had an understanding of math, science, mechanics and engineering that dwarfs the AGWCults