How many posters here are smarter than all the world's scientists?

[GWV5903]

No, that's you being a denier goober with no tools in your toolbox.

So it’s being a denier when the world is still here and your failed leader is wrong? Keep digging, you may eventually crawl out from under that pile of crap you call home...

That's why you are on a white wing armpit message board masturbating in public

Funny thing is I’ve been a member much longer than you and I have 1/10th the post you have, you are making this to easy....

scienists are out doing science

Yes they are and you’re here sounding like a fool, jealous that someone else has more than you do...

 

[Flash]

According to the Environmental Wackos global warming is caused by racism. I shit you not.

No, it's not. Stop being stupid.

AOC said it just this last week. She is the self proclaimed leader of the Democrat Party and proponent of the Environmental Wacko White Men Haters's Club.

 

[skookerasbil]

Not sure but here's a group not so impressed....

New study explains why nearly 20 percent of electric car owners return to gas

 

[Crick]

When people look closely at the claims of scientific consensus and the research that has been published, the issue of this being a "settled science" isn't so clear. In fact the opposite seems to be true:

"The most highly cited paper supposedly found 97 per cent of published scientific studies support man-made global warming. But in addition to poor survey methodology, that tabulation is often misrepresented. Most papers (66 per cent) actually took no position. Of the remaining 34 per cent, 33 per cent supported at least a weak human contribution to global warming. So divide 33 by 34 and you get 97 per cent, but this is unremarkable since the 33 per cent includes many papers that critique key elements of the IPCC position."

........

"Second, it is obvious that the “97%” mantra is untrue. The underlying issues are so complex it is ludicrous to expect unanimity. The near 50/50 split among AMS members on the role of greenhouse gases is a much more accurate picture of the situation. The phoney claim of 97% consensus is mere political rhetoric aimed at stifling debate and intimidating people into silence."

Putting the 'con' in consensus; Not only is there no 97 per cent consensus among climate scientists, many misunderstand core issues: op-ed

In the lead-up to the Paris climate summit, massive activist pressure is on all governments, especially Canada’s, to fall in line with the global warming agenda and accept emission targets that could seriously harm our economy.

www.fraserinstitute.org

.

What is phony here is what your source claims to be the topic of the consensus. No one is claiming that all these thousands of scientists don't have issues of one sort or another with the IPCC and their assessment reports. That's the freaking nature of science. But virtually NO ONE disagrees that global warming is taking place and that its primary cause is human CO2 emissions.

 

[Crick]

No-Bake KoolWhip Cheesecake

Blend one 8 oz package of reduced fat Neufchatel cheese (cream chees) and 1/4 cup of sugar (or Splenda if you like).
Fold in an 8-oz tub of whipped cream (this can also be low fat variety)
Pour into a 9 inch graham cracker crust and chill in the fridge for 2 hours
Slice a package of strawberries into quarters, put into a tupperware container with a couple spoons of sugar (or more Splenda). Shake lightly and put in the fridge with the pie.
Just before serving put the strawberries on top
Try not to eat the whole thing by yourself.

 

[ding]

How smart do you have to be to know that it's not a good idea to want the planet to be colder when it's in the middle of an ice age?

 

[Hossfly]

I don't see the tools with which we used to post up polls but we can ad lib.

Just tell us in the comments. How many people believe they are more intelligent than all the world's active climate scientists. In case you were unsure, if you have EVER put up a post that accused all those scientists of lying, of being biased by "donations and bribes", of claiming that they put out results to please whoever pays for their grants, you should post "ME!". Got it? Okay. Can't wait to see the results!

 

[Crick]

Does the Kraken look like an M&M with arms and legs? I thought it was some sort of sea monster. Or is that supposed to be the Fat Lady?

The alternative to attempting to defend your charge that the world's climate scientists don't know what they're doing or that they're all doing it for the grant money or they're all doing it because they're all heavily invested in green companies or they're all doing it because they hate life and freedom and each their own country and they want to destroy it all... is that someone could actually find and present some evidence that ANY of that nonsensical BULLSHIT is true. You all say it, over and over again, from left to right and right to left, but no one ever has any actual evidence that what you are claiming is true. What we need to see is a statement from a bona fide climate scientist that says, "yes, we are lying because it makes us rich" or "yes, we are lying because we hate everyone" or... something. If not, just give it the fuck up cause you fools are getting boring as shit.

 

[skookerasbil]

But here's the thing.....

We've ALL heard from the climate OCD's for 20 years about this "consensus".

As Crick says, "No one disagrees that there is global warming....."

Ok....but then, so what? Why even have this forum if it is such a slam dunk?

The reason...of course....is that despite the "consensus", the green people have had little or no influence on public policy makers. Renewable energy after 20 years is still a laughingstock in the world of energy.....not even debatable for a nano-second.

Which is why guys like Crick routinely fly off the handle in a fit of rage in here. Like all the climate crusaders....all so fiercely passionate about global warming for over two decades and what do they have to show for it?

Dick

Which means "the science" isn't mattering, consensus or no.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How smart do you have to be to know that it's not a good idea to want the planet to be colder when it's in the middle of an ice age?

Oh come on, you know that if retreating glaciers are bad, advancing glaciers must be awesome!!!

 

[Crick]

According to the Environmental Wackos global warming is caused by racism. I shit you not.

No, it's not. Stop being stupid.

AOC said it just this last week. She is the self proclaimed leader of the Democrat Party and proponent of the Environmental Wacko White Men Haters's Club.

She said what?

 

[gtopa1]

I don't see the tools with which we used to post up polls but we can ad lib.

Just tell us in the comments. How many people believe they are more intelligent than all the world's active climate scientists. In case you were unsure, if you have EVER put up a post that accused all those scientists of lying, of being biased by "donations and bribes", of claiming that they put out results to please whoever pays for their grants, you should post "ME!". Got it? Okay. Can't wait to see the results!

Every single poster who identifies as conservative, right wing, republican, or tRump supporter.

I suspect many of these denier posters won‘t have the conjones to come out and join this discussion, though we know who most of these posters are.

Every scientist in the world admits the on going climate crisis. Not one scientist in the world has ever come out against it. That’s enough to tell you that we’re all fucked unless we make drastic changes like banning meat, air travel, the gas industry and so much more.

For some reason Trumptards don’t believe science and are becoming a threat to the existence of life in earth

Koonin points out scientific facts supported by hard data and the peer-reviewed literature that stand against the reigning climate change narrative: humans have had no detectable impact on hurricanes over the past century; Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was eighty years ago; tornado frequency and severity are not trending up; the number and severity of droughts are not rising over time either; the extent of global fires has been trending significantly downward; the rate of sea-level rise has not accelerated; global crop yields are rising, not falling; the net economic impact of human-induced climate change will be minimal through at least the end of this century even if global average temperatures rise by 30 C which is double the Paris Agreement goal.

Let’s Work For Science With Integrity: Steve Koonin’s New Book “Unsettled”

It is not the global climate system that’s broken, it’s the alleged “climate consensus” that is. That in a nutshell is a central message of physicist Steve Koonin’s new book, “Unsettled: what clima…

wattsupwiththat.com

Science is good; activists and the media are stuffed!!!

Greg

 

[gipper]

But here's the thing.....

We've ALL heard from the climate OCD's for 20 years about this "consensus".

As Crick says, "No one disagrees that there is global warming....."

Ok....but then, so what? Why even have this forum if it is such a slam dunk?

The reason...of course....is that despite the "consensus", the green people have had little or no influence on public policy makers. Renewable energy after 20 years is still a laughingstock in the world of energy.....not even debatable for a nano-second.

Which is why guys like Crick routinely fly off the handle in a fit of rage in here. Like all the climate crusaders....all so fiercely passionate about global warming for over two decades and what do they have to show for it?

Dick

Which means "the science" isn't mattering, consensus or no.

You’d think after all the doomsday predictions made by climate cultists, that have been entirely wrong, they’d have given up by now. They are persistent little cusses.

A family member who visits Fire Island often adamantly told me ten years ago, the island would be under water in ten years. When I reminded him of this, it did nothing to change his cult like belief in AGW.

 

[JoeMoma]

if global average temperatures rise by 30 C which is double the Paris Agreement goal.

By 30 C? Now that will kill us all.

 

[Flash]

Ok....but then, so what? Why even have this forum if it is such a slam dunk?

The fact that we have post glacial warming is a slam dunk. Nobody disagrees with that. That is a scientific fact. The earth has been warming since the end of the last ice age and will probably continue to do so.

However, AGW is not a slam dunk. It has not been proven that man made activities have contributed to any significant degree to the climate of the earth. We have contributed significant pollution but there is no real evidence of AGW.

There are some unscientific correlations and a lot of computer modeling using ridiculous data but no real data.

That is why that the Climate Scientists have been caught red handed on many occasions fudging data. If they use real data that have nothing so they make up data. They also ignore valid historical data and nothing they ever predict comes true. They are batting zero.

Why do they do it? The obvious answer is that they are simply Moon Bats that are confused about everything. However, it more likely tied to funding sources. It could be a Ted Kaczynski type mentality that is rebelling against technology and human progress; "If we all just have wind mills and solar panels we can all just sit around Walden Pond and be groovey". We saw that kind of mentality in the Climategate emails.

The fact is that this silly AGW scam has turned into a religion of the Left. A religion that is not based on anything real and it is both silly and destructive at the same time.

 

[Flash]

According to the Environmental Wackos global warming is caused by racism. I shit you not.

No, it's not. Stop being stupid.

AOC said it just this last week. She is the self proclaimed leader of the Democrat Party and proponent of the Environmental Wacko White Men Haters's Club.

She said what?

Yes Moon Bats are this silly

AOC now blames ‘racial injustice’ for the climate crisis

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made the controversial remarks as she pushed for the Green New Deal.

nypost.com

AOC now blames ‘racial injustice’ for the climate crisis

 

[Crick]

This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

However, the core of her argument is “The climate crisis is a crisis born of injustice, and it is a crisis born of the pursuit of profit at any and all human and ecological cost” which is perfectly valid. AOC could breathe heavily and you assholes would attack her for it. I think she's an intelligent and well-spoken progressive. She's a little to my left, so we don't see eye to eye on most things, but I have no problem with the Green New Deal. She's just trying to sell it and salespeople are known to exaggerate. Like Trump talking about peaceful BLM protestors.

 

[Crick]

Ok....but then, so what? Why even have this forum if it is such a slam dunk?

The fact that we have post glacial warming is a slam dunk. Nobody disagrees with that. That is a scientific fact. The earth has been warming since the end of the last ice age and will probably continue to do so.

However, AGW is not a slam dunk. It has not been proven that man made activities have contributed to any significant degree to the climate of the earth. We have contributed significant pollution but there is no real evidence of AGW.

There are some unscientific correlations and a lot of computer modeling using ridiculous data but no real data.

That is why that the Climate Scientists have been caught red handed on many occasions fudging data. If they use real data that have nothing so they make up data. They also ignore valid historical data and nothing they ever predict comes true. They are batting zero.

Why do they do it? The obvious answer is that they are simply Moon Bats that are confused about everything. However, it more likely tied to funding sources. It could be a Ted Kaczynski type mentality that is rebelling against technology and human progress; "If we all just have wind mills and solar panels we can all just sit around Walden Pond and be groovey". We saw that kind of mentality in the Climategate emails.

The fact is that this silly AGW scam has turned into a religion of the Left. A religion that is not based on anything real and it is both silly and destructive at the same time.

Flash, you have already been noted as someone who believes they are smarter than the thousands of PhD climate researchers around the world. That indicates that you are done here. Please take your other comments to a more pertinent thread.

 

[Crick]

But here's the thing.....

We've ALL heard from the climate OCD's for 20 years about this "consensus".

As Crick says, "No one disagrees that there is global warming....."

Ok....but then, so what? Why even have this forum if it is such a slam dunk?

The reason...of course....is that despite the "consensus", the green people have had little or no influence on public policy makers. Renewable energy after 20 years is still a laughingstock in the world of energy.....not even debatable for a nano-second.

Which is why guys like Crick routinely fly off the handle in a fit of rage in here. Like all the climate crusaders....all so fiercely passionate about global warming for over two decades and what do they have to show for it?

Dick

Which means "the science" isn't mattering, consensus or no.

You’d think after all the doomsday predictions made by climate cultists, that have been entirely wrong, they’d have given up by now. They are persistent little cusses.

A family member who visits Fire Island often adamantly told me ten years ago, the island would be under water in ten years. When I reminded him of this, it did nothing to change his cult like belief in AGW.

Do you know how many times poster Billy Bob, who claims to be an atmospheric physicist working on his PhD, has warned us of imminent cooling? And take three guesses as to his batting average?

 

[harmonica]

No, it's not. Stop being stupid.

No, it's not. Stop being stupid.

It's good advice, you should take it too.

hahahha--you babble a lot