Communists, Radicals Spotted Throughout Climate March In Nyc Demanding ‘revolution, Nothing Less’

[georgephillip]

It would take over 240,000 of the largest nuclear bombs ever built just to raise the temperature of the Antarctica ice cap...wait for it...1 degree. Not melt it just to raise it 1 degree, 240,000 big ass nukes. Tell us again libs how humans are causing global warming.

Show your math:
"...the temperature at the core of the (nuclear) explosion is always between 50 and 150 million degrees Fahrenheit... So the temperature of the center of a nuclear bomb can reach temperatures hotter than the core of our sun."

Introversion bull View topic - How hot is a nuclear explosion

This was in the news, go argue with the Algebra teacher who calculated this with his students as an exercise, let us know if you can prove him wrong my guess is you can't.

You can't supply a link proving your own allegation?

 

[BluesLegend]

It would take over 240,000 of the largest nuclear bombs ever built just to raise the temperature of the Antarctica ice cap...wait for it...1 degree. Not melt it just to raise it 1 degree, 240,000 big ass nukes. Tell us again libs how humans are causing global warming.

Show your math:
"...the temperature at the core of the (nuclear) explosion is always between 50 and 150 million degrees Fahrenheit... So the temperature of the center of a nuclear bomb can reach temperatures hotter than the core of our sun."

Introversion bull View topic - How hot is a nuclear explosion

This was in the news, go argue with the Algebra teacher who calculated this with his students as an exercise, let us know if you can prove him wrong my guess is you can't.

You can't supply a link proving your own allegation?

I don't provide links to liberals who pretend they don't know how to look something up on the internet. Furthermore, if you people yanked the liberal kool-aid IV out of your arms and showed up at the forum informed and ready to have a discussion we wouldn't have to waste time providing you with a zillion links now would we.

 

[georgephillip]

It would take over 240,000 of the largest nuclear bombs ever built just to raise the temperature of the Antarctica ice cap...wait for it...1 degree. Not melt it just to raise it 1 degree, 240,000 big ass nukes. Tell us again libs how humans are causing global warming.

Show your math:
"...the temperature at the core of the (nuclear) explosion is always between 50 and 150 million degrees Fahrenheit... So the temperature of the center of a nuclear bomb can reach temperatures hotter than the core of our sun."

Introversion bull View topic - How hot is a nuclear explosion

This was in the news, go argue with the Algebra teacher who calculated this with his students as an exercise, let us know if you can prove him wrong my guess is you can't.

You can't supply a link proving your own allegation?

I don't provide links to liberals who pretend they don't know how to look something up on the internet. Furthermore, if you people yanked the liberal kool-aid IV out of your arms and showed up at the forum informed and ready to have a discussion we wouldn't have to waste time providing you with a zillion links now would we.

Don't have a link or a clue, do you, Skippy?

 

[BluesLegend]

It would take over 240,000 of the largest nuclear bombs ever built just to raise the temperature of the Antarctica ice cap...wait for it...1 degree. Not melt it just to raise it 1 degree, 240,000 big ass nukes. Tell us again libs how humans are causing global warming.

Show your math:
"...the temperature at the core of the (nuclear) explosion is always between 50 and 150 million degrees Fahrenheit... So the temperature of the center of a nuclear bomb can reach temperatures hotter than the core of our sun."

Introversion bull View topic - How hot is a nuclear explosion

This was in the news, go argue with the Algebra teacher who calculated this with his students as an exercise, let us know if you can prove him wrong my guess is you can't.

You can't supply a link proving your own allegation?

I don't provide links to liberals who pretend they don't know how to look something up on the internet. Furthermore, if you people yanked the liberal kool-aid IV out of your arms and showed up at the forum informed and ready to have a discussion we wouldn't have to waste time providing you with a zillion links now would we.

Don't have a link or a clue, do you, Skippy?

Apparently you choose ignorance as a lifestyle, troll yourself over to some other poster I'm done with you.

 

[paulitician]

Maybe you could get them outlawed, Stupie!

The People are moving on. Your Global Warming Boogeyman whining is old & tired. You're free to 'save the planet' anyway you see fit. Buy a tent, go off the grid, and go live in the woods. Do what ya gotta do. No one's stopping you. But leave the rest of us alone. You're not gonna be allowed to force your agenda on others by way of Government force. You wingnuts are just gonna have to learn to deal with that.

The commies and the radicals are The People, too. And frankly they are less of a threat to the US than Republicans are. In fact I'd rate them right down there with you libertarians.

But you want them silenced.

Irony at its finest.

Do what you gotta do personally, to defeat your Global Warming Boogeyman. But leave the rest of us alone. We will not allow you to force your agenda on us. Deal with it.

 

[Stephanie]

VULGAR language in video

 

[flacaltenn]

Sledgehammers and burning down people's homes and getting arrested.
Did I say 2% knew that solar only works 6 hours a day? Make that 1% or less..

 

[flacaltenn]

This is what all the "climate change aka Globull Warming " is ALL ABOUT. people better WAKE UP in this country
GREEN IS RED.

SNIP:
US
‘F*** the Police’: Communists, Radicals Spotted Throughout Climate March in New York City Demanding ‘Revolution, Nothing Less’

Sep. 21, 2014 3:58pm Oliver Darcy
6.4K
Shares

Tens-of-thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of New York City Sunday to demand political leaders take action on climate change.
While the protest remained peaceful, much of the “People’s Climate March” appeared to be made up of fringe elements of the political left.

Image source: Oliver Darcy/TheBlaze
Dozens of signs denouncing capitalism were spotted at the demonstration, often held by self-proclaimed socialists.
“Capitalism is destroying the planet,” a sticker on one woman’s shirt read, “We need revolution, nothing less.”

Image source: Oliver Darcy/TheBlaze
In one instance, activists shouted “f**k the police,” demanding justice for the shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.

Others took advantage of the demonstration’s liberal-leaning crowd, attempting to sell literature and t-shirts to them.

ALL of it here:
F the Police Communists Radicals Spotted Throughout Climate March in New York City Demanding 8216 Revolution Nothing Less Video TheBlaze.com

Can you handle the truth, Stef?
Capitalism is Poisoning this Planet.
Deal with it.

Seems not!!

Global premature mortality due to anthropogenic outdoor air pollution and the contribution of past climate change - IOPscience

You do want the FACTS, don't you??

Greg

Facts like the following?

"A comprehensive analysis of peer-reviewed articles on the topic of global warming and climate change has revealed an overwhelming consensus among scientists that recent warming is human-caused."

Study reveals scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

Through Skeptical Science?????????? lmao. You mean Greenpeacenics?? get a real study!!

Greg

If you're looking for OPINIONS from climate scientists, the WORSE place to look would be in their technical papers. Not only that but the shittyscience.com inspired "poll" has been beaten to a pulp over fraudulent representations of "no opinion" as SUPPORTING Global Warming hype and exaggerations. NO reputable poll would EVER attempt such a dishonest statistical assertion...

 

[georgephillip]

VULGAR language in video

Stupid, corrupt congressmen.
Jon Stewart Takes Climate Change-Denying Congressmen To School

 

[georgephillip]

This is what all the "climate change aka Globull Warming " is ALL ABOUT. people better WAKE UP in this country
GREEN IS RED.

SNIP:
US
‘F*** the Police’: Communists, Radicals Spotted Throughout Climate March in New York City Demanding ‘Revolution, Nothing Less’

Sep. 21, 2014 3:58pm Oliver Darcy
6.4K
Shares

Tens-of-thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of New York City Sunday to demand political leaders take action on climate change.
While the protest remained peaceful, much of the “People’s Climate March” appeared to be made up of fringe elements of the political left.

Image source: Oliver Darcy/TheBlaze
Dozens of signs denouncing capitalism were spotted at the demonstration, often held by self-proclaimed socialists.
“Capitalism is destroying the planet,” a sticker on one woman’s shirt read, “We need revolution, nothing less.”

Image source: Oliver Darcy/TheBlaze
In one instance, activists shouted “f**k the police,” demanding justice for the shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.

Others took advantage of the demonstration’s liberal-leaning crowd, attempting to sell literature and t-shirts to them.

ALL of it here:
F the Police Communists Radicals Spotted Throughout Climate March in New York City Demanding 8216 Revolution Nothing Less Video TheBlaze.com

Can you handle the truth, Stef?
Capitalism is Poisoning this Planet.
Deal with it.

Seems not!!

Global premature mortality due to anthropogenic outdoor air pollution and the contribution of past climate change - IOPscience

You do want the FACTS, don't you??

Greg

Facts like the following?

"A comprehensive analysis of peer-reviewed articles on the topic of global warming and climate change has revealed an overwhelming consensus among scientists that recent warming is human-caused."

Study reveals scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

Through Skeptical Science?????????? lmao. You mean Greenpeacenics?? get a real study!!

Greg

If you're looking for OPINIONS from climate scientists, the WORSE place to look would be in their technical papers. Not only that but the shittyscience.com inspired "poll" has been beaten to a pulp over fraudulent representations of "no opinion" as SUPPORTING Global Warming hype and exaggerations. NO reputable poll would EVER attempt such a dishonest statistical assertion...

"The study is the most comprehensive yet and identified 4000 summaries, otherwise known as abstracts, from papers published in the past 21 years that stated a position on the cause of recent global warming – 97 per cent of these endorsed the consensus that we are seeing man-made, or anthropogenic, global warming (AGW)."

For the record, do you believe AGW is a hoax?

Study reveals scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

 

[Lakhota]

Thank you, Google, for finally wising up.

Google Chairman: Climate Change Deniers Are 'Literally Lying'

 

[Clementine]

The securitization of a foot treadle.

Everything can be securitized. I like to joke that even a hooker can be securitized. Through actuarials, it can be determined how many apples an apple tree will produce, or how many tricks a hooker can turn, over the next 20 years. You can sell today the apples that will grow next year, or two years from now, or three years from now, if you wish. If you are a grocery store that depends on a steady apple supply, and you are worried the price of apples is going to rise, you can lock in the price of future apples from that tree and protect yourself from the risk of rising prices.

If you own the apple tree, and think the price of apples is going to fall, you can lock in a price now and sell the future apples from the tree and protect yourself from the risk of falling prices.

If the buyer thinks the price is going to rise, and the seller thinks the price is going to fall, one of them is going to be wrong, but both will have a predictable price at which those apples will change hands. Their operating costs and revenues can be more easily managed through this futures market.

A "market maker" can place himself between the farmer and grocer. He can buy apples for a nickel apiece from the farmer and sell the apples for a dime apiece to the grocer. And the apples haven't even grown yet!

The market maker ordinarily serves a useful function. The grocer doesn't have to find a bunch of farmers to sell him apples, and the farmers don't have to find grocers to buy their apples. The market maker acts as the middle man and worries about who to buy and sell from, and he gets his piece of the action as profit.

This is what Goldman Sachs, and their ilk, do for a living. They act as the middleman between commodities sellers and buyers.

However, this places them in a position to manipulate the shit out of commodities. And they do. Goldman Sachs et al. buy up metals and then hoard them, creating artificial shortages. These are the new organized crime families.


So let's talk foot treadles.


Suppose some rice farmer in India is using a bunch of foot treadle pumps to irrigate his rice fields. He's got an army of underlings peddling their asses off every day to get water to his rice. The farmer has decided it would be cheaper and more efficient to start using motorized pumps to get water to his crops.

But the global climate change cabal has determined it would be a bad thing for this darkie to modernize. They see his motorized pumps as adding to the carbon in the atmosphere. And so they offer him a cash incentive to not modernize and stay a primitive.

This means they have to work out how much carbon he would have produced over the next 20 years if he had switched over to mechanical methods, and then work out a price how much that absence of carbon production is worth. They can assign "carbon credits" for every x amount of carbon this farmer agrees not to produce. These credits can then be traded on an exchange.

This future non-production of carbon can be securitized and sold to investors by Goldman Sachs! A factory that made too much carbon can buy some foot treadle credits to "offset" their overages.


But here's the thing. One day, a couple years from now, the farmer decides, "Fuck it, man. I'm tired of dealing with all these underlings who are peddling their asses off and griping at me all the time. I'm going to switch to motors, carbon traders be damned."

Now those carbon credits for future foot treadle carbon credits just went up in a puff of smoke, literally. Those credits are out there, already sold and being traded. But they are credits against foot treadles which no longer exist.

And this is where the system implodes. And you can be sure Goldman Sachs will keep trading those bogus credits with the full knowledge they are fraudulent, just as they sold toxic securities during the lead-up to the subprime crash.

Fantastic explanation. Also, since companies will buy the carbon credits, they will still pollute just the same. It's not really about reducing emissions, just charging for them. That means Goldman Sucks makes more money while the pollution remains the same as it is now. They will buy credits low and sell them high. Yippee, a grotesque fortune for them while the emissions don't change any measureable amount.

It's simply a way to redistribute money with no changes to the environment.

Most of us could figure out a way to sell credits, even though we currently have no business that pollutes. We can sell credits by not building a wood burning fireplace in our home or not buying a larger vehicle. Some would rake in cash by coming up with ways not to increase our carbon footprint, though we can change our minds later. The credits will have the same worth as a no-docs loan backed by Fannie or Freddie. Worthless pieces of paper that will eventually burst the bubble.

What the liberals need to get through their thick skulls is that it's not a matter of accepting or denying global warming. It's a matter of asking IF we can do anything and there is nothing wrong with denying that the proposed solution is nothing but a huge scam. You don't have to adopt both the theory of climate change and the liberal answer to it. They are separate. One may have merit, the other is complete bullshit.

If you believe we need to change things, then start looking for more earth friendly ways to heat our homes and run our cars. Utilities are about to go sky high, as Obama promised. That just means people will suffer financially because currently there are no other options and we don't even have choices in energy companies. But, we will pay more as if we are being punished for wanting to stay warm in winter and for driving to work. The only change is yet another hit on the people while government rakes in our money.

 

[flacaltenn]

If you're looking for OPINIONS from climate scientists, the WORSE place to look would be in their technical papers. Not only that but the shittyscience.com inspired "poll" has been beaten to a pulp over fraudulent representations of "no opinion" as SUPPORTING Global Warming hype and exaggerations. NO reputable poll would EVER attempt such a dishonest statistical assertion...

"The study is the most comprehensive yet and identified 4000 summaries, otherwise known as abstracts, from papers published in the past 21 years that stated a position on the cause of recent global warming – 97 per cent of these endorsed the consensus that we are seeing man-made, or anthropogenic, global warming (AGW)."

For the record, do you believe AGW is a hoax?

Study reveals scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

What those chronic liars DIDN'T tell ya was those 4000 papers and abstracts --- only about 50 expressed ANY OPINION at all.. Which is what I was telling you about seeking OPINION in a scientific paper. But the criminals at shittyscience.com didn't let that stop them. They just added in all the "no opinion" papers to their phoney ass consensus..

It's a fraud Georgie Boy -- and furthermore it was long ago before the temperature pause and those embarrassing leaks of emails from East Anglia. Just the fact that you don't SEE CURRENT POLLS of climate scientists like you used to --- ought to tip you off. If you're not a dumbass.

Short answer to what I believe.. The basic physics statement of the power of CO2 to warm the Atmos is about 1degC/doubling of CO2. BOTH sides of the AGW argument agree to that as I do..

But AGW is based on hysterics about feedbacks and dynamics of a climate system that we barely understand. And AGW using Magic Multipliers to get from 1degC/doubling to about 6 or 8 degC/doubling.
Mankind has yet to double the pre-industrial level of CO2. And all OBSERVED warming is closer to the basic Atmos Physics fact than the fantasically exaggerated AGW claims..

So I don't believe in the Magic part. And I certainly don't buy the argument that the Earth climate is so unstable that it would destroy itself without further help from man in a runaway thermal condition.. These are things I KNOW from studying the topic for about a decade.

So what do YOU BELIEVE Georgie? What's the Global Temp. anomaly gonna be in 2060? Please reply in kind..

 

[flacaltenn]

The securitization of a foot treadle.

Everything can be securitized. I like to joke that even a hooker can be securitized. Through actuarials, it can be determined how many apples an apple tree will produce, or how many tricks a hooker can turn, over the next 20 years. You can sell today the apples that will grow next year, or two years from now, or three years from now, if you wish. If you are a grocery store that depends on a steady apple supply, and you are worried the price of apples is going to rise, you can lock in the price of future apples from that tree and protect yourself from the risk of rising prices.

If you own the apple tree, and think the price of apples is going to fall, you can lock in a price now and sell the future apples from the tree and protect yourself from the risk of falling prices.

If the buyer thinks the price is going to rise, and the seller thinks the price is going to fall, one of them is going to be wrong, but both will have a predictable price at which those apples will change hands. Their operating costs and revenues can be more easily managed through this futures market.

A "market maker" can place himself between the farmer and grocer. He can buy apples for a nickel apiece from the farmer and sell the apples for a dime apiece to the grocer. And the apples haven't even grown yet!

The market maker ordinarily serves a useful function. The grocer doesn't have to find a bunch of farmers to sell him apples, and the farmers don't have to find grocers to buy their apples. The market maker acts as the middle man and worries about who to buy and sell from, and he gets his piece of the action as profit.

This is what Goldman Sachs, and their ilk, do for a living. They act as the middleman between commodities sellers and buyers.

However, this places them in a position to manipulate the shit out of commodities. And they do. Goldman Sachs et al. buy up metals and then hoard them, creating artificial shortages. These are the new organized crime families.


So let's talk foot treadles.


Suppose some rice farmer in India is using a bunch of foot treadle pumps to irrigate his rice fields. He's got an army of underlings peddling their asses off every day to get water to his rice. The farmer has decided it would be cheaper and more efficient to start using motorized pumps to get water to his crops.

But the global climate change cabal has determined it would be a bad thing for this darkie to modernize. They see his motorized pumps as adding to the carbon in the atmosphere. And so they offer him a cash incentive to not modernize and stay a primitive.

This means they have to work out how much carbon he would have produced over the next 20 years if he had switched over to mechanical methods, and then work out a price how much that absence of carbon production is worth. They can assign "carbon credits" for every x amount of carbon this farmer agrees not to produce. These credits can then be traded on an exchange.

This future non-production of carbon can be securitized and sold to investors by Goldman Sachs! A factory that made too much carbon can buy some foot treadle credits to "offset" their overages.


But here's the thing. One day, a couple years from now, the farmer decides, "Fuck it, man. I'm tired of dealing with all these underlings who are peddling their asses off and griping at me all the time. I'm going to switch to motors, carbon traders be damned."

Now those carbon credits for future foot treadle carbon credits just went up in a puff of smoke, literally. Those credits are out there, already sold and being traded. But they are credits against foot treadles which no longer exist.

And this is where the system implodes. And you can be sure Goldman Sachs will keep trading those bogus credits with the full knowledge they are fraudulent, just as they sold toxic securities during the lead-up to the subprime crash.

Fantastic explanation. Also, since companies will buy the carbon credits, they will still pollute just the same. It's not really about reducing emissions, just charging for them. That means Goldman Sucks makes more money while the pollution remains the same as it is now. They will buy credits low and sell them high. Yippee, a grotesque fortune for them while the emissions don't change any measureable amount.

It's simply a way to redistribute money with no changes to the environment.

Most of us could figure out a way to sell credits, even though we currently have no business that pollutes. We can sell credits by not building a wood burning fireplace in our home or not buying a larger vehicle. Some would rake in cash by coming up with ways not to increase our carbon footprint, though we can change our minds later. The credits will have the same worth as a no-docs loan backed by Fannie or Freddie. Worthless pieces of paper that will eventually burst the bubble.

What the liberals need to get through their thick skulls is that it's not a matter of accepting or denying global warming. It's a matter of asking IF we can do anything and there is nothing wrong with denying that the proposed solution is nothing but a huge scam. You don't have to adopt both the theory of climate change and the liberal answer to it. They are separate. One may have merit, the other is complete bullshit.

If you believe we need to change things, then start looking for more earth friendly ways to heat our homes and run our cars. Utilities are about to go sky high, as Obama promised. That just means people will suffer financially because currently there are no other options and we don't even have choices in energy companies. But, we will pay more as if we are being punished for wanting to stay warm in winter and for driving to work. The only change is yet another hit on the people while government rakes in our money.

Actually, the concept works well for REAL POLLUTION, because we easily monetize the "external costs" of things like particulates and SO2. Not so much CO2.. Because of the uncertain and convoluted effect it MIGHT have on externalities. Costs of credits should fluctuate with the costs of mitigation. Yet -- the estimates of warming in 2060 range from 1.4degC to 5degC and the "costs" are just as good as a wild guess. And it's hard to assess that cost on a gas where Mother Nature pollutes 20 times as much as man and a gas that appears in your fizzy drinks..

So the article accurately asserts that you can monetize a hooker. But CO2 is a bit more tricky when it comes from cow farts or your beer..

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Trillions for third world shitholes, BEFORE ITS TOO LATE !!!

 

[gtopa1]

Can you handle the truth, Stef?
Capitalism is Poisoning this Planet.
Deal with it.

Seems not!!

Global premature mortality due to anthropogenic outdoor air pollution and the contribution of past climate change - IOPscience

You do want the FACTS, don't you??

Greg

Facts like the following?

"A comprehensive analysis of peer-reviewed articles on the topic of global warming and climate change has revealed an overwhelming consensus among scientists that recent warming is human-caused."

Study reveals scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

Through Skeptical Science?????????? lmao. You mean Greenpeacenics?? get a real study!!

Greg

If you're looking for OPINIONS from climate scientists, the WORSE place to look would be in their technical papers. Not only that but the shittyscience.com inspired "poll" has been beaten to a pulp over fraudulent representations of "no opinion" as SUPPORTING Global Warming hype and exaggerations. NO reputable poll would EVER attempt such a dishonest statistical assertion...

"The study is the most comprehensive yet and identified 4000 summaries, otherwise known as abstracts, from papers published in the past 21 years that stated a position on the cause of recent global warming – 97 per cent of these endorsed the consensus that we are seeing man-made, or anthropogenic, global warming (AGW)."

For the record, do you believe AGW is a hoax?

Study reveals scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

there are many hoaxes in the AGW debate: the biggest is that there is catastrophe awaiting us unless we all send the USA back to the stone age.

Greg

 

[georgephillip]

If you're looking for OPINIONS from climate scientists, the WORSE place to look would be in their technical papers. Not only that but the shittyscience.com inspired "poll" has been beaten to a pulp over fraudulent representations of "no opinion" as SUPPORTING Global Warming hype and exaggerations. NO reputable poll would EVER attempt such a dishonest statistical assertion...

"The study is the most comprehensive yet and identified 4000 summaries, otherwise known as abstracts, from papers published in the past 21 years that stated a position on the cause of recent global warming – 97 per cent of these endorsed the consensus that we are seeing man-made, or anthropogenic, global warming (AGW)."

For the record, do you believe AGW is a hoax?

Study reveals scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

What those chronic liars DIDN'T tell ya was those 4000 papers and abstracts --- only about 50 expressed ANY OPINION at all.. Which is what I was telling you about seeking OPINION in a scientific paper. But the criminals at shittyscience.com didn't let that stop them. They just added in all the "no opinion" papers to their phoney ass consensus..

It's a fraud Georgie Boy -- and furthermore it was long ago before the temperature pause and those embarrassing leaks of emails from East Anglia. Just the fact that you don't SEE CURRENT POLLS of climate scientists like you used to --- ought to tip you off. If you're not a dumbass.

Short answer to what I believe.. The basic physics statement of the power of CO2 to warm the Atmos is about 1degC/doubling of CO2. BOTH sides of the AGW argument agree to that as I do..

But AGW is based on hysterics about feedbacks and dynamics of a climate system that we barely understand. And AGW using Magic Multipliers to get from 1degC/doubling to about 6 or 8 degC/doubling.
Mankind has yet to double the pre-industrial level of CO2. And all OBSERVED warming is closer to the basic Atmos Physics fact than the fantasically exaggerated AGW claims..

So I don't believe in the Magic part. And I certainly don't buy the argument that the Earth climate is so unstable that it would destroy itself without further help from man in a runaway thermal condition.. These are things I KNOW from studying the topic for about a decade.

So what do YOU BELIEVE Georgie? What's the Global Temp. anomaly gonna be in 2060? Please reply in kind..

I'm inclined to accept the following conclusion at face value; if you are not, please explain why:
"We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.

"We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming.

"Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming."

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature - IOPscience

 

[Stephanie]

we really should just laugh at this bunch of misfits on parade. Not even a cohesive message in the group of supposedly, 300, 000 IDIOTS

I mean really folks, 300 thousand out of 360 MILLION people. It was in NEW YAK they have 300 thousand fruit cakes just living there

hey they got see Leo Decrappo at least

 

[Stephanie]

The sad part in all this, is those people are so stupid they don't realize all they ARE is BEING USED by politicians like, Al Gore and his Millionaire buddies like the Kennedys... who wants to IMPOSE their rules on them and all OF YOU

 

[paulitician]

The sad part in all this, is those people are so stupid they don't realize all they ARE is BEING USED by politicians like, Al Gore and his Millionaire buddies like the Kennedys... who wants to IMPOSE their rules on them and all OF YOU

It's an irrational fear of the Global Warming Boogeyman. Fear is the most important tool used to force agendas on others. Most if not all behind the Global Warming fear mongering are Left Wing/Communists. They want to force their agenda by way of Government intimidation & force. That's what Communists do.

But the People are beginning to wake up. They're deciding to take their chances with the Global Warming Boogeyman, rather than with the Communist assholes. They're choosing Freedom & Liberty instead.