First it was global cooling, then global, warming, then climate change, now it's.....

[ScienceRocks]

Now it is the climate pause

 

[KNB]

Yeah, because Obama wants to legalize weed. He said he'll do it right after he's taken away everyone's guns so that it's safe for bloodthirsty stoners to go on raping sprees.

You're smart enough to run for Congress as a Republican.

And YOU are dumb enough to continue to be led by the nose.

IDIOT

"Led around by the nose", while explaining how to cripple the big government police state. Yeah, because corporate media and Obama lead me around by the nose.

The war on drugs was started right after a special government panel reported that marijuana should be legalized. The big government has used "marihuana" prohibition as an excuse to use more invasive police tactics and erode American civil liberties. We put people in jail for the exact same thing that helped stop the Holocaust.

Will Conservatives scoff at the idea of "marihuana" helping to end the Holocaust? The proof is right there. "Producer of Marihuana", for the US military, in order to win World War II and stop the Holocaust. It's right there in black and white, the way Conservatives love to see things.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Enjoy the record drought, record heat, and record fires...

How the hell do you get to Nazi eugenics, Vig?

we have had long droughts before,had a long one in the 70's......and 3 digit temps around here?....give me a break......and were is the record fires?....arson has nothing to do with naturally occurring fires....

hey its Frankie......he never questions.....just does....i can see him telling his former students......"never question a Democrat.....they never make mistakes.....but those Republicans and anyone else.....dont trust them".....

 

[Harry Dresden]

It's funny to watch a bunch of people who struggled through high school and wear a name tag to work pretend that they have any clue how our climate works and how mans actions do or do not affect our planet.

Yes, please tell us more about how the entire world is in on the global conspiracy to get the $6 you have burning a hole in your wallet that you didn't spend at Dennys.

guys who work at NASA wear name tags.....the Doctors at UCI wear tags too.....so that means what?.....your stupid?....

you're

nice answer.....so you said something stupid.....dont feel bad,even Presidents have said stupid things....

 

[Locke11_21]

OK. You are just so smart, why is it that all the Scientfic Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the world have policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger? It could not be that you are just another flap-yapping ignoramous, could it?

The scientific reasons for the warming are well understood, and have been for over a century.

Service Unavailable.

That is from the American Institute of Physics, the largest Scientific Society in world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Hey anus face,

I'm not alone on this one. 31,487 scientists, including 9,029 PhD agree that it's a myth.

Global Warming Petition Project

Futhermore, perhaps instead of believing in Bigfoot, the Easter Bunny, Santa Clause and climate...whatever they change the name to, read the books by meteorologist Brian Sussman and watch the videos of Dr. Michael Coffman. Greenpeace co-founder, Patrick Moore testified before the senate that man caused climate change is a myth. Even the "father" of climate change, James Lovelock has bailed out on this fairy tale.

Dumb fuck, that is the OISM petition, and it has been shown to be fraudulent time and again.

Once again, every Scientific Society, ever National Academy of Science, and every major University states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. Just because it disagrees with your silly political views does not change that reality. All you are doing with posting shit sites is demonstrating what an ignorant ass you truly are.

Hey shitstain brain,

So, the petition is fraudulent because it doesn't pertain to your radical Marxist agenda. Yet, you have the audacity to attack me in the manner you do. As far as universities and the NAS go, I could care less what those bastions of radical leftism have to say. However, I know what you have to say, and that is baaaahhhahahahaaahh. The only clear and present danger is idiots like you who are too dumb to think for yourself and do nothing more than bleat what your lead sheep bleats.

How silly are my views? You are not the majority. Just remember, it is your side that was caught in the Climategate scandal. It was your side that removed temperature reading devices from cool climate regions and only took reading from areas like tarmacs from airports to get the highest possible readings to further your agenda. Your hockey stick has been overwhelmingly been proven to be a lie. Your majority of climatologists believe in global warming is a lie......especially when out of 10,257 surveys sent, only 77 who replied were actually climatologists. Here is a list of global warming lies:


MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.

FACT: The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, warming to 1941, cooling to 1964, warming to 1998 and cooling through 2011. The warming rate from 1964 to 1998 was the same as the previous warming from 1911 to 1941. Satellites, weather balloons and ground stations all show cooling since 2001. The mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8 C over the 20th century is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas (“heat islands&#8221, which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas (“land use effects&#8221. Two science teams have shown that correcting the surface temperature record for the effects of urban development would reduce the warming trend over land from 1980 by half.

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.

MYTH 2: The “hockey stick” graph proves that the earth has experienced a steady, very gradual temperature decrease for 1000 years, then recently began a sudden increase.

FACT: Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the “average global temperature” has been rising at the low steady rate mentioned above; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.

The “hockey stick”, a poster boy of both the UN’s IPCC and Canada’s Environment Department, ignores historical recorded climatic swings, and has now also been proven to be flawed and statistically unreliable as well. It is a computer construct and a faulty one at that.



MYTH 3: Human produced carbon dioxide has increased over the last 100 years, adding to the Greenhouse effect, thus warming the earth.

FACT: Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout geologic time. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased. The RATE of growth during this period has also increased from about 0.2% per year to the present rate of about 0.4% per year,which growth rate has now been constant for the past 25 years. However, there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth’s oceans expel more CO2 as a result.



MYTH 4: CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas.

FACT: Greenhouse gases form about 3% of the atmosphere by volume. They consist of varying amounts, (about 97%) of water vapour and clouds, with the remainder being gases like CO2, CH4, Ozone and N2O, of which carbon dioxide is the largest amount. Hence, CO2 constitutes about 0.039% of the atmosphere. While the minor gases are more effective as “greenhouse agents” than water vapour and clouds, the latter are overwhelming the effect by their sheer volume and – in the end – are thought to be responsible for 75% of the “Greenhouse effect”. (See here) At current concentrations, a 3% change of water vapour in the atmosphere would have the same effect as a 100% change in CO2.

Those attributing climate change to CO2 rarely mention these important facts.
MYTH 5: Computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming.

FACT: The computer models assume that CO2 is the primary climate driver, and that the Sun has an insignificant effect on climate. You cannot use the output of a model to verify or prove its initial assumption – that is circular reasoning and is illogical. Computer models can be made to roughly match the 20th century temperature rise by adjusting many input parameters and using strong positive feedbacks. They do not “prove” anything. Also, computer models predicting global warming are incapable of properly including the effects of the sun, cosmic rays and the clouds. The sun is a major cause of temperature variation on the earth surface as its received radiation changes all the time, This happens largely in cyclical fashion. The number and the lengths in time of sunspots can be correlated very closely with average temperatures on earth, e.g. the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period. Varying intensity of solar heat radiation affects the surface temperature of the oceans and the currents. Warmer ocean water expels gases, some of which are CO2. Solar radiation interferes with the cosmic ray flux, thus influencing the amount ionized nuclei which control cloud cover.


MYTH 6: The UN proved that man–made CO2 causes global warming.

FACT: In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:
1) “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
2) “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man–made causes”

To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.
MYTH 7: CO2 is a pollutant.

FACT: This is absolutely not true. Nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere. We could not live in 100% nitrogen either. Carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is. CO2 is essential to life on earth. It is necessary for plant growth since increased CO2 intake as a result of increased atmospheric concentration causes many trees and other plants to grow more vigorously. Unfortunately, the Canadian Government has included CO2 with a number of truly toxic and noxious substances listed by the Environmental Protection Act, only as their means to politically control it.
MYTH 8: Global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes.

FACT: There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that supports such claims on a global scale. Regional variations may occur. Growing insurance and infrastructure repair costs, particularly in coastal areas, are sometimes claimed to be the result of increasing frequency and severity of storms, whereas in reality they are a function of increasing population density, escalating development value, and ever more media reporting.


MYTH 9: Receding glaciers and the calving of ice shelves are proof of global warming.

FACT: Glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for hundreds of years. Recent glacier melting is a consequence of coming out of the very cool period of the Little Ice Age. Ice shelves have been breaking off for centuries. Scientists know of at least 33 periods of glaciers growing and then retreating. It’s normal. Besides, glacier’s health is dependent as much on precipitation as on temperature.


MYTH 10: The earth’s poles are warming; polar ice caps are breaking up and melting and the sea level rising.

FACT: The earth is variable. The western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer, due to cyclic events in the Pacific Ocean, but the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder. The small Palmer Peninsula of Antarctica is getting warmer, while the main Antarctic continent is actually cooling. Ice thicknesses are increasing both on Greenland and in Antarctica.

Sea level monitoring in the Pacific (Tuvalu) and Indian Oceans (Maldives) has shown no sign of any sea level rise.


Oh, and if your side was so confident in the mythology it espouses, why is it your side is trying so hard to silence any differing views:

Study suggesting global warming is exaggerated was rejected for publication in respected journal because it was 'less than helpful' to the climate cause, claims professor | Mail Online

If your mythological side is so correct, why are you trying to silence opposing view? Is it because you have no answers and have decided fascism is the the way to go in order to save face? Yes, the fascism route is your only hope. Just remember, it is your side that wants people arrested for disagreeing with you because your side is losing due to not enough facts to back your myth.

 

[jon_berzerk]

let it snow

let it snow

let it snow

--LOL

Snow In May In Chicago: This Is Not A Joke « CBS Chicago

 

[AntiParty]

....global climate disruption. How many name changes will this have to go through to try and sell the same fairy tale, myth, nonsense and alarmism? If it has to go through this many name changes, it's garbage. This has completely taken snake oil to a new level. Oh, but Barack Obama has talked with meteorologists about this. Obama doesn't associate with meteorologists, he associates with Weathermen.

Global cooling, warming, climate change, disruption, whatever; it's a radical cult religion that has two gods: the village idiot and chicken little.

I don't have time to read past your title which is Hilarious.

Global warming means erratic changes in temperature and not "the globe is getting warm" IMAGINE THAT RIGHT WING SMALL BRAINS. Your media says, "they cover all their bases and sometimes it's not warm............

Science isn't the Right Wing Strong point...........

 

[westwall]

....global climate disruption. How many name changes will this have to go through to try and sell the same fairy tale, myth, nonsense and alarmism? If it has to go through this many name changes, it's garbage. This has completely taken snake oil to a new level. Oh, but Barack Obama has talked with meteorologists about this. Obama doesn't associate with meteorologists, he associates with Weathermen.

Global cooling, warming, climate change, disruption, whatever; it's a radical cult religion that has two gods: the village idiot and chicken little.

I don't have time to read past your title which is Hilarious.

Global warming means erratic changes in temperature and not "the globe is getting warm" IMAGINE THAT RIGHT WING SMALL BRAINS. Your media says, "they cover all their bases and sometimes it's not warm............

Science isn't the Right Wing Strong point...........

This is what you and your fellow cultists call science.....

Here is the pertinent passage.....

"The full quote actually said “Summarising, the simplistic comparison of ranges from AR4, AR5, and Otto et al, combined with the statement they are inconsistent is less then helpful, actually it is harmful as it opens the door for oversimplified claims of "errors" and worse from the climate sceptics media side.”

Statement from IOP Publishing on story in The Times


That's why climatology as a specialty is doomed. They have so destroyed whatever credibility they had, it will take decades to recover if ever....

 

[ScienceRocks]

I hope to live long to see our planet get to 500ppm of co2! Hopefuly if I live to 80

 

[Theowl32]

As opposed to what? Getting all worked up over total bullshit?

Treehuggers are relevant.

Without much of the industrial pollution issues that were resolved 30+ years ago, there must be new boogymen to attack.

Tree huggers get cold, and wet, and annoyed, when people ignore them.

Just watch these tree hugging liberals. Just......please watch. It is only 1:48. You won't find many things that will make you laugh harder than this.




It will also make you sick, but....it is funny as hell. It is not fake either.

 

[Politico]

I hope to live long to see our planet get to 500ppm of co2! Hopefuly if I live to 80

Hopefully for us I hope you won't.

 

[Theowl32]

....global climate disruption. How many name changes will this have to go through to try and sell the same fairy tale, myth, nonsense and alarmism? If it has to go through this many name changes, it's garbage. This has completely taken snake oil to a new level. Oh, but Barack Obama has talked with meteorologists about this. Obama doesn't associate with meteorologists, he associates with Weathermen.

Global cooling, warming, climate change, disruption, whatever; it's a radical cult religion that has two gods: the village idiot and chicken little.

I don't have time to read past your title which is Hilarious.

Global warming means erratic changes in temperature and not "the globe is getting warm" IMAGINE THAT RIGHT WING SMALL BRAINS. Your media says, "they cover all their bases and sometimes it's not warm............

Science isn't the Right Wing Strong point...........

There is no argument if the earth is getting warmer, it is getting warmer and has been since the little ice age ended which was around 1850. This is about man made global warming and if CO2 is causing it.

That is the debate, and there are plenty of scientists that are not on board with the man made global warming scam.

Of course when we provide the list of 31000 scientists that signed a petition, there is always one asshole who claims they are mainly physicists and not climatologists.

Funny, because when we do provide climatologists they call them whack jobs. I also find it pretty funny as if any liberal actually looked to see if EVERY scientist that did sign the petition were ONLY physicists.

These are the types of morons we are dealing with in regards to the global warming hysteria.



If you want, I will not only provide all of the names of the 31000 scientists and their ethos, but I will provide the money that is generated from the green scams.

I will provide the real motivation behind the "climatologists" who are on board with this notion.

There is more than enough science that contradicts the MAN MADE claims. More than enough.


It ought to clue you in when John Kerry goes and publicly calls man made global warming a "WMD" and he goes right to the left wing script by blaming "BIG OIL."

If that does not provide you with what it is really all about when they go to cliches, then you are the one that is not relying on science.

Now, let me know if you want me to list the 31000 scientists with their names and credentials. Then after that tell us how science is not the conservatives strong suit.

 

[Old Rocks]

The American Geophysical Union has over 35,000 members, and the most scientists involved in climate studies of any Scientific Society. Here is part of their statement on AGW;

http://sciencepolicy.agu.org/files/2013/07/AGU-Climate-Change-Position-Statement_August-2013.pdf

Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric
concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat‐trapping greenhouse gases have increased
sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase.
Human‐caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed
global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because
natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide)
from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate
system for millennia.
Extensive, independent observations confirm the reality of global warming. These
observations show large‐scale increases in air and sea temperatures, sea level, and
atmospheric water vapor; they document decreases in the extent of mountain glaciers,
snow cover, permafrost, and Arctic sea ice. These changes are broadly consistent with longunderstood
physics and predictions of how the climate system is expected to respond to
human‐caused increases in greenhouse gases. The changes are inconsistent with
explanations of climate change that rely on known natural influences.
Climate models predict that global temperatures will continue to rise, with the amount of
warming primarily determined by the level of emissions. Higher emissions of greenhouse
gases will lead to larger warming, and greater risks to society and ecosystems. Some
additional warming is unavoidable due to past emissions.

 

[RDD_1210]

guys who work at NASA wear name tags.....the Doctors at UCI wear tags too.....so that means what?.....your stupid?....

you're

nice answer.....so you said something stupid.....dont feel bad,even Presidents have said stupid things....

It's not my fault that what I said went over your head.

 

[Old Rocks]

The American Geological Society, 26,000 members

The Geological Society of America - Position Statement on Climate Change

As a result, greenhouse gas concentrations, which can be influenced by human activities, and solar fluctuations are the principal remaining factors that could have changed rapidly enough and lasted long enough to explain the observed changes in global temperature. Although the 3rd (2001) IPCC report allowed that solar fluctuations might have contributed as much as 30% of the warming since 1850, subsequent observations of Sun-like stars (Foukal et al., 2004) and new simulations of the evolution of solar sources of irradiance variations (Wang et al., 2005) have reduced these estimates. The 4th (2007) IPCC report concluded that changes in solar irradiance, continuously measured by satellites since 1979, account for less than 10% of the last 150 years of warming. Throughout the era of satellite observation, during periods of strong warming, the data show little evidence of increased solar influence (Foster and Rahmstorf, 2011; Lean and Rind, 2008).

Greenhouse gases remain as the major explanation for the warming. Observations and climate model assessments of the natural and anthropogenic factors responsible for this warming conclude that rising anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases have been an increasingly important contributor since the mid-1800s and the major factor since the mid-1900s (Meehl et al., 2004). The CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is now ~30% higher than peak levels that have been measured in ice cores spanning 800,000 years of age, and the methane concentration is 2.5 times higher. About half of Earth’s warming has occurred through the basic heat-trapping effect of the gases in the absence of any feedback processes. This “clear-sky” response to climate is known with high certainty. The other half of the estimated warming results from the net effect of feedbacks in the climate system: a large positive feedback from water vapor; a smaller positive feedback from snow and ice albedo; a negative feedback from aerosols, and still uncertain,feedbacks from clouds. The vertical structure of observed changes in temperature and water vapor in the troposphere is consistent with the anthropogenic greenhouse-gas “fingerprint” simulated by climate models (Santer et al., 2008). Considered in isolation, the greenhouse-gas increases during the last 150 years would have caused a warming larger than that actually measured, but negative feedback from aerosols and possibly clouds has offset part of the warming. In addition, because the oceans take decades to centuries to respond fully to climatic forcing, the climate system has yet to register the full effect of gas increases in recent decades.

These advances in scientific understanding of recent warming form the basis for projections of future changes. If greenhouse-gas emissions follow predicted trajectories, by 2100 atmospheric CO2 concentrations will reach two to four times pre-industrial levels, for a total warming of 2 °C to 4.5 °C compared to 1850. This range of changes in greenhouse gas concentrations and temperature would substantially alter the functioning of the planet in many ways. The projected changes involve risk to humans and other species: (1) continued shrinking of Arctic sea ice with effects on native cultures and ice-dependent biota; (2) less snow accumulation and earlier melt in mountains, with reductions in spring and summer runoff for agricultural and municipal water; (3) disappearance of mountain glaciers and their late-summer runoff; (4) increased evaporation from farmland soils and stress on crops; (5) greater soil erosion due to increases in heavy convective summer rainfall; (6) longer fire seasons and increases in fire frequency; (7) severe insect outbreaks in vulnerable forests; (8) acidification of the global ocean; and (9) fundamental changes in the composition, functioning, and biodiversity of many terrestrial and marine ecosystems. In addition, melting of Greenland and West Antarctic ice (still highly uncertain as to amount), along with thermal expansion of seawater and melting of mountain glaciers and small ice caps, will cause substantial future sea-level rise, affecting densely populated coastal regions, inundating farmland and dislocating large populations. Because large, abrupt climatic changes occurred within spans of just decades during previous ice-sheet fluctuations, the possibility exists for rapid future changes as ice sheets become vulnerable to large greenhouse-gas increases. Finally, carbon-climate model simulations indicate that 10–20% of the anthropogenic CO2 “pulse” could stay in the atmosphere for thousands of years, extending the duration of fossil-fuel warming and its effects on humans and other species. The acidification of the global ocean and its effects on ocean life are projected to last for tens of thousands of years.

 

[zeke]

....global climate disruption. How many name changes will this have to go through to try and sell the same fairy tale, myth, nonsense and alarmism? If it has to go through this many name changes, it's garbage. This has completely taken snake oil to a new level. Oh, but Barack Obama has talked with meteorologists about this. Obama doesn't associate with meteorologists, he associates with Weathermen.

Global cooling, warming, climate change, disruption, whatever; it's a radical cult religion that has two gods: the village idiot and chicken little.

I don't have time to read past your title which is Hilarious.

Global warming means erratic changes in temperature and not "the globe is getting warm" IMAGINE THAT RIGHT WING SMALL BRAINS. Your media says, "they cover all their bases and sometimes it's not warm............

Science isn't the Right Wing Strong point...........

There is no argument if the earth is getting warmer, it is getting warmer and has been since the little ice age ended which was around 1850. This is about man made global warming and if CO2 is causing it.

That is the debate, and there are plenty of scientists that are not on board with the man made global warming scam.

Of course when we provide the list of 31000 scientists that signed a petition, there is always one asshole who claims they are mainly physicists and not climatologists.

Funny, because when we do provide climatologists they call them whack jobs. I also find it pretty funny as if any liberal actually looked to see if EVERY scientist that did sign the petition were ONLY physicists.

These are the types of morons we are dealing with in regards to the global warming hysteria.



If you want, I will not only provide all of the names of the 31000 scientists and their ethos, but I will provide the money that is generated from the green scams.

I will provide the real motivation behind the "climatologists" who are on board with this notion.

There is more than enough science that contradicts the MAN MADE claims. More than enough.


It ought to clue you in when John Kerry goes and publicly calls man made global warming a "WMD" and he goes right to the left wing script by blaming "BIG OIL."

If that does not provide you with what it is really all about when they go to cliches, then you are the one that is not relying on science.

Now, let me know if you want me to list the 31000 scientists with their names and credentials. Then after that tell us how science is not the conservatives strong suit.

What is the one variable that exists within the time frame you mentioned above? From the mid 1800's or so? It is the burning of huge amounts of coal and oil. Man burns the oil and coal. But you don't think man is the cause of the warming that even you acknowledge.

Well what the fuck do you think burning all this oil and coal is doing? You think it is just an innocent habit that has no consequences? Why would you think that?

You do understand that man has never done this before (burnt all this oil and coal)?
And therefore we don't know what the outcome will be. Can you at least admit that?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Our Top Story Tonight: Number of experiments showing any temperature increase from a 100PPM increase in CO2 is still zero

 

[Old Rocks]

Climate Change: Consensus

Once again, every Scientfic Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University states in their policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. 31,000 on that statement? That is about 0.03 % of the scientists in the world. Actually, we give you better odds, because we only state that 97% of the qualified scientists worldwide state that AGW is real, and that we are it's cause. So, instead of 0.03%, we are giveing you 3%.

As for some of the ridicoulous rants here, glaciers and icecaps are not Marxists. Thawing permafrost has no knowledge of Communism. An ocean with a pH that is lessoning knows nothing of Lenin.

That you people have to make such ignorant and ridiculous assertations simply demonstrates the lack of knowledge, and even sanity, on your part.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Climate Change: Consensus

Once again, every Scientfic Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University states in their policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. 31,000 on that statement? That is about 0.03 % of the scientists in the world. Actually, we give you better odds, because we only state that 97% of the qualified scientists worldwide state that AGW is real, and that we are it's cause. So, instead of 0.03%, we are giveing you 3%.

As for some of the ridicoulous rants here, glaciers and icecaps are not Marxists. Thawing permafrost has no knowledge of Communism. An ocean with a pH that is lessoning knows nothing of Lenin.

That you people have to make such ignorant and ridiculous assertations simply demonstrates the lack of knowledge, and even sanity, on your part.

Science is not done by consensus, you're thinking of "Project Runway"

 

[The T]

Climate Change: Consensus

Once again, every Scientfic Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University states in their policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. 31,000 on that statement? That is about 0.03 % of the scientists in the world. Actually, we give you better odds, because we only state that 97% of the qualified scientists worldwide state that AGW is real, and that we are it's cause. So, instead of 0.03%, we are giveing you 3%.

As for some of the ridicoulous rants here, glaciers and icecaps are not Marxists. Thawing permafrost has no knowledge of Communism. An ocean with a pH that is lessoning knows nothing of Lenin.

That you people have to make such ignorant and ridiculous assertations simply demonstrates the lack of knowledge, and even sanity, on your part.

Science is not done by consensus, you're thinking of "Project Runway"

These 'Scientists' get away with it because they get a lot of Government funding. They have to really try to keep the gravy train going. They're bilking the taxpayers with this nonsense.