Looks Like The Cat's Out Of The Bag....

[PoliticalChic]

Scientific institutions all over the world are in agreement that man made climate change is real. Most first world countries are now taking measures to mitigate it. The most asinine thing you anti-science people do is try to talk back the consensus. If you want to keep insisting there isn't a powerful scientific consensus that's fine, but you're not dealing in reality. I know that doesn't normally bother you too much.

You again and again follow the Consensus fallacy, which does NOTHING for science research. It is a political tool to gauge support for something lawmakers seek.

All those "scientific" institutions BOARD of DIRECTORS made those statements, NOT the full members of the listed organizations, who didn't get to vote on it at all, some resigned in protest and others say this is wrong.

People like you ignore that too which is indicative that you have no idea why the concept of The Scientific Method and the REPRODUCIBILITY of published research flies over your head.

There have been many consensus failures in science that harmed research and caused deaths to people who suffered under consensus bullcrap. Recall that for many years it was a consensus that Ulcers were caused by stress or spicy foods, until someone decided to do actual research to find out what the underlying cause was. It was BACTERIA that caused them.

Get out of the consensus stupidity, maybe you finally realize that science advances one reproducible paper at a time. Consensus pablums doesn't do shit for learning.

"All those "scientific" institutions BOARD of DIRECTORS made those statements, NOT the full members of the listed organizations, who didn't get to vote on it at all,..."

BINGO!


O'Sullivan's First Law (a.k.a. O'Sullivan's Law), paraphrased by George Will as stating that any institution that is not libertarian and classically liberal will, over time, become collectivist and statist. O'Sullivan's First Law: All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing. I cite as supporting evidence the ACLU, the Ford Foundation, and the Episcopal Church. The reason is, of course, that people who staff such bodies tend to be the sort who don't like private profit, business, making money, the current organization of society, and, by extension, the Western world. At which point Michels's Iron Law of Oligarchy takes over — and the rest follows. http://old.nationalreview.com/flashback/flashback-jos062603.asp


This law, of course, reflects the leadership, not the members.

Silly ass, all your lies will not change the fact that the people in this world with scientific training totally think you are full of shit. Since you cannot see anything is any other light other than political, you think everyone else is like that. Most are not. And many, especially scientists, are grounded in reality, a reality that you totally deny. And that reality cares not a bit about your denial, it just continues to be real.

So, by all means, continue to post your cut and paste flap yap, and expose for the whole world to see, the depths of your delusion. The officers of the various Scientific Societies are voted on by the members. If the members do not like the direction of the policy statements of the organization, they can vote in new people that will change that direction. And you claim that all the officers of the Scientific Societies are in on a grand conspiracy, a world wide one, because these are the Scientific Societies of the whole world with it's various nations and cultures, then you little tin hat is on far too tight.

"...all your lies will not change the fact that the people in this world with scientific training...."




Let's check:

1. “… where did that famous “consensus” claim that “98% of all scientists believe in global warming” come from? It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered “yes” to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with.

The first: “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?”

The second question asked: “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?”

Then of those, only a small subset, just 77 who had been successful in getting more than half of their papers recently accepted by peer-reviewed climate science journals, were considered in their survey statistic. That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes”. That Scientific Global Warming Consensus...Not!





77 out of 10,257 becomes 98%.

Yup…figures don’t lie, but liars can figure.





2. Oh….BTW….

“Since 1998, more than 31,000 American scientists from diverse climate-related disciplines, including more than 9,000 with Ph.D.s, have signed a public petition announcing their belief that “…there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.” Included are atmospheric physicists, botanists, geologists, oceanographers, and meteorologists.” Ibid.




You remain another one of the mindless drones that leftist 'education' system cranks out like cogs and sprockets. Unique, just like every other reliable Democrat voter.

And Political Chit continues to be an idiot and a liar. And afraid to reference that '31,000' scientists source. OISM is a fruitcake organization in the metropolis of Cave Junction, Oregon. They support many rightwingnut causes, and are considered to be the fringe of the fringe. A rebuttal to their nonsense;

How the OISM Petition Project casts doubt on the scientific consensus on climate change

There are several claims that large numbers of scientists do not agree with the theory of climate change, the best known of which is a petition organised by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (the OISM petition). This petition now appears to be signed by over 32,000 people with a BSc or higher qualification. The signatories agree with these statements:

• The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
• There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate.

No evidence has ever been offered to support the first statement, and the second statement is in flat contradiction with the scientists who study climate change. There are also valid issues regarding the methodology:

• The organisers have never revealed how many people they canvassed (so the response rate is unknown) nor have they revealed the sampling methodology, an ironic omission considering how much fuss is made about scientists being candid and making public their methods and data.
• The petition is, in terms of climate change science, rather out of date.

In the professional field of climate science, the consensus is unequivocal: human activities are causing climate change and additional anthropogenic CO2 may cause great disruption to the climate.

32,000 Sounds Like A Lot
In fact, OISM signatories represent a tiny fraction (~0.3%) of all US science graduates (petition cards were only sent to individuals within the U.S)

According to figures from the US Department of Education Digest of Education Statistics: 2008, 10.6 million science graduates have gained qualifications consistent with the OISM polling criteria since the 1970-71 school year. 32,000 out of 10 million is not a very compelling figure, but a tiny minority - approximately 0.3 per cent.

There are many issues casting doubt on the validity of this petition. On investigation, attempts to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change often appear to have ideological roots, vested business interests or political sponsors. The claims made for the OISM petition do not withstand objective scrutiny, and the assertions made in the petition are not supported by evidence, data or scientific research.

Several studies conducted independently (Oreskes 2004, Oreskes 2007, Doran and Zimmerman (2009), Anderegg et al. (2010), Cook et. al., 2013) have shown that 97% of climate scientists agree that humans are causing the climate to change, and that anthropogenic greenhouse gases are causing global changes to the climate. These views form the scientific consensus on climate change.

No one still believes it....at least no one with over a double digit IQ....

"New Gallup Poll: Americans do not even mention global warming as a problem – 36 ‘problems’ cited, but not climate

According to the latest Gallup poll, NOBODY thinks global warming is our most important problem, contrary to what NRCM, Audubon and CLF sock puppets tell us."
New Gallup Poll: Americans do not even mention global warming as a problem – 36 ‘problems’ cited, but not climate




The only thing you're missing is a unicycle, you clown.

 

[Billy_Bob]

all your lies will not change the fact that the people in this world with scientific training totally think you are full of shit.

What a load of BULL SHIT!

Some of us who do actually have scientific training see your lies for what they are.. Appealing to those you put on a pedestal and worship is not science...

 

[skookerasbil]

all your lies will not change the fact that the people in this world with scientific training totally think you are full of shit.

What a load of BULL SHIT!

Some of us who do actually have scientific training see your lies for what they are.. Appealing to those you put on a pedestal and worship is not science...

It's either an issue of zero curiosity or as I suspect, a hate America guy pushing the radical left agenda. Most people who latch on love goverrnment as an entity to settle the score with the highly successful among us.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?


Climate alarmists—the ones who believe we are approaching climate doomsday—are confident that the future climate is solely decided on the basis of changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, this is not true with our environment. Their belief in such a hypothesis was put to the test over the past two decades when the temperature forecasts from their computer climate models were compared against the actual real-time temperature measurements for the same period.

The analysis revealed that the computer climate models failed dramatically because of their assumptions that CO2 was the major driver of increase in temperature levels.

The CO2 levels in the atmosphere increased at a very high rate between 1999-2017, but the temperature levels did not rise correspondingly, and the rate of increase fell behind the rate of increase that the temperatures displayed during the decades prior to 1999.

This should have been a major wake up call for the climate alarmists. But they remain stubborn and continue to warn us of an imminent climate doomsday.

Their warning is based on their erroneous theory of a steep temperature increase induced by human CO2 emissions, which has been proven wrong again and again at the highest academic levels and testified to atthe U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology by climate scientists."
Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?

 

[skookerasbil]

"Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?


Climate alarmists—the ones who believe we are approaching climate doomsday—are confident that the future climate is solely decided on the basis of changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, this is not true with our environment. Their belief in such a hypothesis was put to the test over the past two decades when the temperature forecasts from their computer climate models were compared against the actual real-time temperature measurements for the same period.

The analysis revealed that the computer climate models failed dramatically because of their assumptions that CO2 was the major driver of increase in temperature levels.

The CO2 levels in the atmosphere increased at a very high rate between 1999-2017, but the temperature levels did not rise correspondingly, and the rate of increase fell behind the rate of increase that the temperatures displayed during the decades prior to 1999.

This should have been a major wake up call for the climate alarmists. But they remain stubborn and continue to warn us of an imminent climate doomsday.

Their warning is based on their erroneous theory of a steep temperature increase induced by human CO2 emissions, which has been proven wrong again and again at the highest academic levels and testified to atthe U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology by climate scientists."
Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?

They must perpetuate a myth....duh. Anybody who cant see this is an epiC sucker!

 

[Old Rocks]

"Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?


Climate alarmists—the ones who believe we are approaching climate doomsday—are confident that the future climate is solely decided on the basis of changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, this is not true with our environment. Their belief in such a hypothesis was put to the test over the past two decades when the temperature forecasts from their computer climate models were compared against the actual real-time temperature measurements for the same period.

The analysis revealed that the computer climate models failed dramatically because of their assumptions that CO2 was the major driver of increase in temperature levels.

The CO2 levels in the atmosphere increased at a very high rate between 1999-2017, but the temperature levels did not rise correspondingly, and the rate of increase fell behind the rate of increase that the temperatures displayed during the decades prior to 1999.

This should have been a major wake up call for the climate alarmists. But they remain stubborn and continue to warn us of an imminent climate doomsday.

Their warning is based on their erroneous theory of a steep temperature increase induced by human CO2 emissions, which has been proven wrong again and again at the highest academic levels and testified to atthe U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology by climate scientists."
Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?

You are such a pathetic liar. The predictions made by the scientists were accurate, although a bit optimistic. The warming has been greater than the predictions, and the effects more severe.

 

[eagle1462010]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?


Climate alarmists—the ones who believe we are approaching climate doomsday—are confident that the future climate is solely decided on the basis of changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, this is not true with our environment. Their belief in such a hypothesis was put to the test over the past two decades when the temperature forecasts from their computer climate models were compared against the actual real-time temperature measurements for the same period.

The analysis revealed that the computer climate models failed dramatically because of their assumptions that CO2 was the major driver of increase in temperature levels.

The CO2 levels in the atmosphere increased at a very high rate between 1999-2017, but the temperature levels did not rise correspondingly, and the rate of increase fell behind the rate of increase that the temperatures displayed during the decades prior to 1999.

This should have been a major wake up call for the climate alarmists. But they remain stubborn and continue to warn us of an imminent climate doomsday.

Their warning is based on their erroneous theory of a steep temperature increase induced by human CO2 emissions, which has been proven wrong again and again at the highest academic levels and testified to atthe U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology by climate scientists."
Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?

You are such a pathetic liar. The predictions made by the scientists were accurate, although a bit optimistic. The warming has been greater than the predictions, and the effects more severe.

"UN Warns Climate Change Will Destroy Earth By 2005
WORLD—The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came to a grim conclusion regarding the rapid warming of the earth, should people not band together to give more power over to the government in order to turn the tide in the fight against climate change.


The report definitively concluded that climate change will completely destroy the earth by 2005 if we do not take action now.

"We've run all the numbers, and it's absolutely clear: every inch of dry land on the planet will be totally submerged by the year 2005," said one member of the panel. "This is an absolute scientific fact."

When several scientific researchers pointed out that 2005 came and went 13 years ago, they were informed that the earth was actually destroyed, everybody was killed, and we are all actually ghosts.

"Every person on the planet is now a spirit who was killed over a decade ago by climate change," said a UN spokesperson. "And anyone who does not believe this will be labeled a ghost science denier."
UN Warns Climate Change Will Destroy Earth By 2005

 

[mudwhistle]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

It's seriously embarrassing. A bunch of fuck mouthed rednecks from the United States have unraveled the global conspiracy being pushed by some of the most educated people on Earth. Right...

Yup.
Global Warming had to be changed to Climate Change for legal reasons. 20 years ago they said the ice capes would melt in 10 years......New York City would be under water by now.
All of those intelligent people turned out to be wrong.
The primary indicator is the fact that 3rd world countries and China are still dumping tons of poisons into the air and they are exempt from the standards Westerners fall under. The oceans are becoming trash heaps because India and other countries don't recycle their trash. They just throw it in the ocean. America leads the way in pollution control yet its never enough.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

It's seriously embarrassing. A bunch of fuck mouthed rednecks from the United States have unraveled the global conspiracy being pushed by some of the most educated people on Earth. Right...

Yup.
Global Warming had to be changed to Climate Change for legal reasons. 20 years ago they said the ice capes would melt in 10 years......New York City would be under water by now.
All of those intelligent people turned out to be wrong.
The primary indicator is the fact that 3rd world countries and China are still dumping tons of poisons into the air and they are exempt from the standards Westerners fall under. The oceans are becoming trash heaps because India and other countries don't recycle their trash. They just throw it in the ocean. America leads the way in pollution control yet its never enough.

So glad you put that Lemon quote there.



Did you see this?

WASHINGTON – Steven Clifford, author and former CEO of the King Broadcasting Company and National Mobile Television, told PJM that the federal government should “prohibit straight white males from voting” in U.S. elections as a way to “save” democracy."
Former TV CEO Says U.S. Should Ban ‘Straight White Males from Voting’

 

[mudwhistle]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

It's seriously embarrassing. A bunch of fuck mouthed rednecks from the United States have unraveled the global conspiracy being pushed by some of the most educated people on Earth. Right...

Yup.
Global Warming had to be changed to Climate Change for legal reasons. 20 years ago they said the ice capes would melt in 10 years......New York City would be under water by now.
All of those intelligent people turned out to be wrong.
The primary indicator is the fact that 3rd world countries and China are still dumping tons of poisons into the air and they are exempt from the standards Westerners fall under. The oceans are becoming trash heaps because India and other countries don't recycle their trash. They just throw it in the ocean. America leads the way in pollution control yet its never enough.

So glad you put that Lemon quote there.



Did you see this?

WASHINGTON – Steven Clifford, author and former CEO of the King Broadcasting Company and National Mobile Television, told PJM that the federal government should “prohibit straight white males from voting” in U.S. elections as a way to “save” democracy."
Former TV CEO Says U.S. Should Ban ‘Straight White Males from Voting’

To be honest, I think you should be able to pass an exam in order to vote. There are so many who vote that don't know squat.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

It's seriously embarrassing. A bunch of fuck mouthed rednecks from the United States have unraveled the global conspiracy being pushed by some of the most educated people on Earth. Right...

Yup.
Global Warming had to be changed to Climate Change for legal reasons. 20 years ago they said the ice capes would melt in 10 years......New York City would be under water by now.
All of those intelligent people turned out to be wrong.
The primary indicator is the fact that 3rd world countries and China are still dumping tons of poisons into the air and they are exempt from the standards Westerners fall under. The oceans are becoming trash heaps because India and other countries don't recycle their trash. They just throw it in the ocean. America leads the way in pollution control yet its never enough.

So glad you put that Lemon quote there.



Did you see this?

WASHINGTON – Steven Clifford, author and former CEO of the King Broadcasting Company and National Mobile Television, told PJM that the federal government should “prohibit straight white males from voting” in U.S. elections as a way to “save” democracy."
Former TV CEO Says U.S. Should Ban ‘Straight White Males from Voting’

To be honest, I think you should be able to pass an exam in order to vote. There are so many who vote that don't know squat.

But....if they gave the test in government school, they'd just give 'em the answers, you know....Donna Brazile style.

 

[westwall]

"Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?


Climate alarmists—the ones who believe we are approaching climate doomsday—are confident that the future climate is solely decided on the basis of changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, this is not true with our environment. Their belief in such a hypothesis was put to the test over the past two decades when the temperature forecasts from their computer climate models were compared against the actual real-time temperature measurements for the same period.

The analysis revealed that the computer climate models failed dramatically because of their assumptions that CO2 was the major driver of increase in temperature levels.

The CO2 levels in the atmosphere increased at a very high rate between 1999-2017, but the temperature levels did not rise correspondingly, and the rate of increase fell behind the rate of increase that the temperatures displayed during the decades prior to 1999.

This should have been a major wake up call for the climate alarmists. But they remain stubborn and continue to warn us of an imminent climate doomsday.

Their warning is based on their erroneous theory of a steep temperature increase induced by human CO2 emissions, which has been proven wrong again and again at the highest academic levels and testified to atthe U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology by climate scientists."
Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?

You are such a pathetic liar. The predictions made by the scientists were accurate, although a bit optimistic. The warming has been greater than the predictions, and the effects more severe.

No they weren't you inveterate liar. ALL climate "predictions" have been wrong. That's why they don't make them any longer. Instead they use the language of charlatans and palm readers loaded up with words like "could", "may", "might" and "suggests".
None of those words are predictive, they are hedge your bets kind of words, that's why palm readers, and climatologists, use them.

 

[flacaltenn]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

Time to release the ninja scientists to fix those misconceptions.. Think you could get any GW "hair on fire" advocates to an open public debate? Nawww.. Never will happen. The Science is Settled --- RIGHT chief?

 

[Sunsettommy]

"Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?


Climate alarmists—the ones who believe we are approaching climate doomsday—are confident that the future climate is solely decided on the basis of changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, this is not true with our environment. Their belief in such a hypothesis was put to the test over the past two decades when the temperature forecasts from their computer climate models were compared against the actual real-time temperature measurements for the same period.

The analysis revealed that the computer climate models failed dramatically because of their assumptions that CO2 was the major driver of increase in temperature levels.

The CO2 levels in the atmosphere increased at a very high rate between 1999-2017, but the temperature levels did not rise correspondingly, and the rate of increase fell behind the rate of increase that the temperatures displayed during the decades prior to 1999.

This should have been a major wake up call for the climate alarmists. But they remain stubborn and continue to warn us of an imminent climate doomsday.

Their warning is based on their erroneous theory of a steep temperature increase induced by human CO2 emissions, which has been proven wrong again and again at the highest academic levels and testified to atthe U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology by climate scientists."
Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?

You are such a pathetic liar. The predictions made by the scientists were accurate, although a bit optimistic. The warming has been greater than the predictions, and the effects more severe.

The IPCC doesn't agree with you, they are the ones starting in 1990 PREDICTED an AVERAGE of .30C/ decade warming trend. The reality is less than .20C/decade which you ignore because you have baloney to protect.

 

[rightwinger]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

I have a big brain, very big, big, big brain
I’m smart, very smart, probably the smartest poster ever on USMB

Believe me

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?


Climate alarmists—the ones who believe we are approaching climate doomsday—are confident that the future climate is solely decided on the basis of changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, this is not true with our environment. Their belief in such a hypothesis was put to the test over the past two decades when the temperature forecasts from their computer climate models were compared against the actual real-time temperature measurements for the same period.

The analysis revealed that the computer climate models failed dramatically because of their assumptions that CO2 was the major driver of increase in temperature levels.

The CO2 levels in the atmosphere increased at a very high rate between 1999-2017, but the temperature levels did not rise correspondingly, and the rate of increase fell behind the rate of increase that the temperatures displayed during the decades prior to 1999.

This should have been a major wake up call for the climate alarmists. But they remain stubborn and continue to warn us of an imminent climate doomsday.

Their warning is based on their erroneous theory of a steep temperature increase induced by human CO2 emissions, which has been proven wrong again and again at the highest academic levels and testified to atthe U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology by climate scientists."
Weather, Climate, and Climate Doomsday: Why Do Climate Alarmist Predictions Fail?

You are such a pathetic liar. The predictions made by the scientists were accurate, although a bit optimistic. The warming has been greater than the predictions, and the effects more severe.

The predictions made by the scientists were accurate,

Of course, that's why they keep cheating, suppressing and adjusting the old data.

 

[skookerasbil]

Looks like Conservative misinformation is working

I have a big brain, very big, big, big brain
I’m smart, very smart, probably the smartest poster ever on USMB

Believe me

We're all real happy for ya s0n.....but dang, how many posts did it take you? Isnt your post count up to some st00pid number now like 450,000?

 

[mamooth]

Thread summary:

The deniers are all just screaming hysterically, no longer even pretending that the science backs up their dogshit pseudoscience. The OP was actually dumb enough to pretend that public opinion affects the science facts. Other deniers are just doing that "lie outright about the data" thing they've been trained do so well.

Why do they do that? Because all the real science flatly contradicts their dogshit pseudoscience. As admitting that is not ever an option for a denier (the cult forbids such moral behavior), and being how they're so helpless at debating the science, the only available option they see is deflection-by-way-of-shrieking-hysteria.

It's so good to be on the rational side. To "win", we simply point to reality. Case closed. No conspiracy theories necessary, so we never look like drooling cult imbeciles. No lies necessary, so we never get all twisted up trying to remember what lies we told in the past. No evasions necessary, so we never look like cowardly weasels. And we look like freakin' geniuses in comparison, because the people we're talking to look like such freakin' morons.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Thread summary:

The deniers are all just screaming hysterically, no longer even pretending that the science backs up their dogshit pseudoscience. The OP was actually dumb enough to pretend that public opinion affects the science facts. Other deniers are just doing that "lie outright about the data" thing they've been trained do so well.

Why do they do that? Because all the real science flatly contradicts their dogshit pseudoscience. As admitting that is not ever an option for a denier (the cult forbids such moral behavior), and being how they're so helpless at debating the science, the only available option they see is deflection-by-way-of-shrieking-hysteria.

It's so good to be on the rational side. To "win", we simply point to reality. Case closed. No conspiracy theories necessary, so we never look like drooling cult imbeciles. No lies necessary, so we never get all twisted up trying to remember what lies we told in the past. No evasions necessary, so we never look like cowardly weasels. And we look like freakin' geniuses in comparison, because the people we're talking to look like such freakin' morons.

Post summary: "I don't care that no one but me still believes the fake global warming lie."


You can go now.