Climate Change Deniers among our Elected Representatives

[Hale]

If my data is BS, so is yours sweet cheeks.

I make no claims to having any sources for Medieval global temperature data.

This is your claim, so show us the data or admit you lied.

 

[Leo123]

'Climate Change' is a BS term in the first place as applied to human-cause GW. We all know GW could not be proven so they had to us the CC term so that ANY climate anomaly could be attributed to humans and therefore be monetized for their fake 'Climate Change" industry.

 

[SSDD]

Climate always changes, always has. No proof humans effect weather. I would not vote for any nutjob who is on the GW bandwagon. No matter how much tax they extort, they could not move the temp gauge 0.0001 deg.

And there has always been stupid fucks like you.

There is proof humans are the cause for the heightened levels of CO2 in oyu atmoshere. Quit being such a fucking idiot.

Even that is questionable if you look at the literature...we don't even make enough CO2 to overcome the natural variation in the earth's own CO2 making machinery from year to year...and there isn't any observed, measured evidence to support the claim that CO2 causes warming anyway...20 years ago, the claim was that doubling CO2 would raise temperatures by 6 degrees...that number has been steadily falling and is now less than a degree and still trending towards zero were it belongs..

 

[Hale]

God are you stupid.

This:

is data.

You're accusing people of denying science, and you think this is data?

Words to describe your ignorance escape me entirely.

 

[SSDD]

Louisiana loses a football field size of land to rising sea levels every HOUR.

Louisiana is sinking...it isn't due to rising seas...the land is sinking and has been for a very long time...ditto for south florida. Learn the difference between rising seas and sinking land

 

[SSDD]

Climate Change due to man made emissions deniers are the absolute dumbest fucking people on the planet. Stupid, ignorant, uneducated, inbred, worthless, selfish, dumbasses

Can you produce a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the claim that the climate change we have seen is anything other than natural variation.

 

[Hale]

Crick - You've got a LONG way to go. Here, I'll help you get started:

What Is Science?

 

[SSDD]

The only person demonstrating ignorance is you, dude. Here, this is what is called evidence. You tell me, if the Maldives were truly going underwater, as you and your fellow travelers claim, who in their right mind would invest a dime? That's the problem with your claims. They are easily refuted by facts. No one, and I mean NO ONE, would invest one thin dime if the claims were true.

That's the problem people like you have, you don't understand simple logic.

I never mentioned the Maldives dick face.

oh, poor wittle baby. The Maldives are almost always mentioned in the same breath as Kiribati, fool. Both are used by the propagandists to push a false narrative. A false narrative that you are either too stupid to understand is false, or are too invested in the eventual outcome to care.

The latest study found the island to be growing....

 

[Hale]

SSDD - Love your signature. If I'd read it earlier, I might have saved some time.

No matter, I'll count Crick as insane and continue to post for the benefit of the lurkers.

 

[SSDD]

God are you stupid.

This:

is data.

that is bullshit...the MWP project I provide above demonstrates that your graph is crap with hundreds of studies worldwide..

 

[SSDD]

God are you stupid.

This:

is data.

Actually, no, it isn't. This is a creation. It has no factual data involved in its creation.

More model output that he believes is reality...sad isn't it?

 

[the other mike]

oh, poor wittle baby. The Maldives are almost always mentioned in the same breath as Kiribati, fool. Both are used by the propagandists to push a false narrative. A false narrative that you are either too stupid to understand is false, or are too invested in the eventual outcome to care.

So your way of admitting you made a mistake is to deny that you made a mistake. Perfect.
I'm gonna slightly bend one of the rules here and say, I bet you've been through several failed marriages haven't you ?

 

[westwall]

oh, poor wittle baby. The Maldives are almost always mentioned in the same breath as Kiribati, fool. Both are used by the propagandists to push a false narrative. A false narrative that you are either too stupid to understand is false, or are too invested in the eventual outcome to care.

So your way of admitting you made a mistake is to deny that you made a mistake. Perfect.
I'm gonna slightly bend one of the rules here and say, I bet you've been through several failed marriages haven't you ?

I made no mistake. I pointed out to you that the Maldives and Kiribati both inhabit the ocean. An ocean that doesn't seem to be rising as fast as your propagandists claim based on the investment in airports. I chose to highlight the Maldives because people actually want to go there for vacation, so a lot of stuff is written about them that is not polluted by propaganda, unlike Kiribati which suffers from unlikeability so no one reports on it other than the propagandists.

 

[the other mike]

oh, poor wittle baby. The Maldives are almost always mentioned in the same breath as Kiribati, fool. Both are used by the propagandists to push a false narrative. A false narrative that you are either too stupid to understand is false, or are too invested in the eventual outcome to care.

So your way of admitting you made a mistake is to deny that you made a mistake. Perfect.
I'm gonna slightly bend one of the rules here and say, I bet you've been through several failed marriages haven't you ?

I made no mistake. I pointed out to you that the Maldives and Kiribati both inhabit the ocean. An ocean that doesn't seem to be rising as fast as your propagandists claim based on the investment in airports. I chose to highlight the Maldives because people actually want to go there for vacation, so a lot of stuff is written about them that is not polluted by propaganda, unlike Kiribati which suffers from unlikeability so no one reports on it other than the propagandists.

They're 8000 miles apart in different oceans. Sea level rise is discussed about in reference to many other places , and I would bet you can't find any quote online mentioning the two places in the same sentence ( which isn't a random coincidence). I'll be waiting anxiously for your next ignorant response since you seem to like being spanked in public.

 

[Kilroy2]

"What would you think if your government didn't believe in gravity? If your senator alleged that, because they couldn't see it, perhaps it didn't exist. To many, this might seem absurd—the science is enough to know that it's real."

The Climate Change Deniers in Congress

"Almost 30 years ago, a NASA scientist named James Hansen pleaded with Congress, under the Reagan Administration, to accept the evidence and do something about it. "It is already happening now," Hansen said before a Congressional committee in 1988."

"Fast-forward three decades, and the United States is facing one of its most anti-science Congresses in history. Many members of the Senate and House of Representatives have gone on-record to denounce climate change as a hoax. Others have proven through their votes that regulating greenhouse gas emissions is not a priority. And still, some state representatives claim to believe in human-made climate change, but consistently support policies that would erode initiatives to combat it."

The colors used here are no mistake. The alignment between a representatives position on AGW and his political party is almost perfect. And you can see many instances of the same reasoning you'll find here on this forum, in the halls of our Congress. The most common answer seen from our representatives is that the Earth's climate has always been dynamic and that the changes over the last century and a half are simply Mother Nature at work. Unsurprisingly, that reasoning is as easily refuted as all the rest. Of course the Earth's climate is dynamic, but through its very long history, that dynamicism has resulted in changes orders of magnitude slower than the changes we are witnessing now. And the various variable factors that naturally control our climate: ex solar irradiance and orbital mechanics, indicate that we should be cooling now. But, of course, we are not.

So, once again, would you vote for a representative that didn't believe in gravity? What if he thought we were all actually held down by magnetism or by wee demons trying to drag us to Hell? Would you vote for a senate candidate that believed the Earth was flat, that humans had never traveled to space, much less the moon? Would you vote for a presidential candidate who believed that modern medicine was an evil to be eliminated from modern society? The belief that the rate of warming we are currently experiencing is a natural climatic change (or a lie constructed by thousands of corrupt scientists) and that human GHG emissions have no involvement, is just as false and just as dangerous.

I find it really amazing that people who have no knowledge of the issue have a opinion based on convenience. They do not bother looking at the facts.

Man use to believe the world was flat and to the average joe it could easily be confirmed by looking out the window then go back to sleep

deniers find it easy to listen to politicians vs doing the research themselves

 

[the other mike]

I find it really amazing that people who have no knowledge of the issue have a opinion based on convenience. They do not bother looking at the facts.

Man use to believe the world was flat and to the average joe it could easily be confirmed by looking out the window then go back to sleep

deniers find it easy to listen to politicians vs doing the research themselves

These guys here know the truth- I can smell fossil fuel shills 8000 miles away.

 

[westwall]

oh, poor wittle baby. The Maldives are almost always mentioned in the same breath as Kiribati, fool. Both are used by the propagandists to push a false narrative. A false narrative that you are either too stupid to understand is false, or are too invested in the eventual outcome to care.

So your way of admitting you made a mistake is to deny that you made a mistake. Perfect.
I'm gonna slightly bend one of the rules here and say, I bet you've been through several failed marriages haven't you ?

I made no mistake. I pointed out to you that the Maldives and Kiribati both inhabit the ocean. An ocean that doesn't seem to be rising as fast as your propagandists claim based on the investment in airports. I chose to highlight the Maldives because people actually want to go there for vacation, so a lot of stuff is written about them that is not polluted by propaganda, unlike Kiribati which suffers from unlikeability so no one reports on it other than the propagandists.

They're 8000 miles apart in different oceans. Sea level rise is discussed about in reference to many other places , and I would bet you can't find any quote online mentioning the two places in the same sentence ( which isn't a random coincidence). I'll be waiting anxiously for your next ignorant response since you seem to like being spanked in public.

Different oceans with the same MSL. Duh. Face it, dude, when it comes to scientific matters you are an infant. The oceans are all basically the same level, the differences we see from ocean to ocean are due to wind, currents, river discharges, and variations in gravity and temperature that keep the oceans from ever being "level". That's why we use LMSL.

 

[Weatherman2020]

"What would you think if your government didn't believe in gravity? If your senator alleged that, because they couldn't see it, perhaps it didn't exist. To many, this might seem absurd—the science is enough to know that it's real."

The Climate Change Deniers in Congress

"Almost 30 years ago, a NASA scientist named James Hansen pleaded with Congress, under the Reagan Administration, to accept the evidence and do something about it. "It is already happening now," Hansen said before a Congressional committee in 1988."

"Fast-forward three decades, and the United States is facing one of its most anti-science Congresses in history. Many members of the Senate and House of Representatives have gone on-record to denounce climate change as a hoax. Others have proven through their votes that regulating greenhouse gas emissions is not a priority. And still, some state representatives claim to believe in human-made climate change, but consistently support policies that would erode initiatives to combat it."

The colors used here are no mistake. The alignment between a representatives position on AGW and his political party is almost perfect. And you can see many instances of the same reasoning you'll find here on this forum, in the halls of our Congress. The most common answer seen from our representatives is that the Earth's climate has always been dynamic and that the changes over the last century and a half are simply Mother Nature at work. Unsurprisingly, that reasoning is as easily refuted as all the rest. Of course the Earth's climate is dynamic, but through its very long history, that dynamicism has resulted in changes orders of magnitude slower than the changes we are witnessing now. And the various variable factors that naturally control our climate: ex solar irradiance and orbital mechanics, indicate that we should be cooling now. But, of course, we are not.

So, once again, would you vote for a representative that didn't believe in gravity? What if he thought we were all actually held down by magnetism or by wee demons trying to drag us to Hell? Would you vote for a senate candidate that believed the Earth was flat, that humans had never traveled to space, much less the moon? Would you vote for a presidential candidate who believed that modern medicine was an evil to be eliminated from modern society? The belief that the rate of warming we are currently experiencing is a natural climatic change (or a lie constructed by thousands of corrupt scientists) and that human GHG emissions have no involvement, is just as false and just as dangerous.

Why do you hate science?

 

[the other mike]

oh, poor wittle baby. The Maldives are almost always mentioned in the same breath as Kiribati, fool. Both are used by the propagandists to push a false narrative. A false narrative that you are either too stupid to understand is false, or are too invested in the eventual outcome to care.

So your way of admitting you made a mistake is to deny that you made a mistake. Perfect.
I'm gonna slightly bend one of the rules here and say, I bet you've been through several failed marriages haven't you ?

I made no mistake. I pointed out to you that the Maldives and Kiribati both inhabit the ocean. An ocean that doesn't seem to be rising as fast as your propagandists claim based on the investment in airports. I chose to highlight the Maldives because people actually want to go there for vacation, so a lot of stuff is written about them that is not polluted by propaganda, unlike Kiribati which suffers from unlikeability so no one reports on it other than the propagandists.

They're 8000 miles apart in different oceans. Sea level rise is discussed about in reference to many other places , and I would bet you can't find any quote online mentioning the two places in the same sentence ( which isn't a random coincidence). I'll be waiting anxiously for your next ignorant response since you seem to like being spanked in public.

Different oceans with the same MSL. Duh. Face it, dude, when it comes to scientific matters you are an infant. The oceans are all basically the same level, the differences we see from ocean to ocean are due to wind, currents, river discharges, and variations in gravity and temperature that keep the oceans from ever being "level". That's why we use LMSL.

As I said, sea level rise is discussed about in reference to many other places ( South Florida, New Orleans, Holland, SE Asia) - stop going around with that arrogant superior attitude, and being a total asswipe.

 

[Weatherman2020]

"What would you think if your government didn't believe in gravity? If your senator alleged that, because they couldn't see it, perhaps it didn't exist. To many, this might seem absurd—the science is enough to know that it's real."

The Climate Change Deniers in Congress

"Almost 30 years ago, a NASA scientist named James Hansen pleaded with Congress, under the Reagan Administration, to accept the evidence and do something about it. "It is already happening now," Hansen said before a Congressional committee in 1988."

"Fast-forward three decades, and the United States is facing one of its most anti-science Congresses in history. Many members of the Senate and House of Representatives have gone on-record to denounce climate change as a hoax. Others have proven through their votes that regulating greenhouse gas emissions is not a priority. And still, some state representatives claim to believe in human-made climate change, but consistently support policies that would erode initiatives to combat it."

The colors used here are no mistake. The alignment between a representatives position on AGW and his political party is almost perfect. And you can see many instances of the same reasoning you'll find here on this forum, in the halls of our Congress. The most common answer seen from our representatives is that the Earth's climate has always been dynamic and that the changes over the last century and a half are simply Mother Nature at work. Unsurprisingly, that reasoning is as easily refuted as all the rest. Of course the Earth's climate is dynamic, but through its very long history, that dynamicism has resulted in changes orders of magnitude slower than the changes we are witnessing now. And the various variable factors that naturally control our climate: ex solar irradiance and orbital mechanics, indicate that we should be cooling now. But, of course, we are not.

So, once again, would you vote for a representative that didn't believe in gravity? What if he thought we were all actually held down by magnetism or by wee demons trying to drag us to Hell? Would you vote for a senate candidate that believed the Earth was flat, that humans had never traveled to space, much less the moon? Would you vote for a presidential candidate who believed that modern medicine was an evil to be eliminated from modern society? The belief that the rate of warming we are currently experiencing is a natural climatic change (or a lie constructed by thousands of corrupt scientists) and that human GHG emissions have no involvement, is just as false and just as dangerous.

Earth has only 12 years if we don’t act.

When do we start bombing coal plants in China and India?