Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Someone paying the bill has a political agenda and it doesn't matter? Really how stupid can you be?
I am paying someone for information that must be shown as favorable for my postion
Wake the fuck up god damn idiots everywhere.
If you go to a Dr and say, I'll pay you but you have to give this diagnosis, what do you think that he'd do?
If he's a legitimate professional he'll tell you goodbye.
Thats the definition of professionals.
Scientists are professionals. Obviously you are not.
Thats not my problem.
If he wants the funds for his research well you get the point and maybe not.If he's a legitimate professional he'll tell you goodbye.
global warming is by far the most politically charged of all and who gains the most with faulty data? The one whose pushing green across America.
Eat shit bitchIf you go to a Dr and say, I'll pay you but you have to give this diagnosis, what do you think that he'd do?
If he's a legitimate professional he'll tell you goodbye.
Thats the definition of professionals.
Scientists are professionals. Obviously you are not.
Thats not my problem.
If he wants the funds for his research well you get the point and maybe not.If he's a legitimate professional he'll tell you goodbye.
global warming is by far the most politically charged of all and who gains the most with faulty data? The one whose pushing green across America.
What faulty data? Present links, or shut the fuck up. Links from real scientists, not frauds like Watts and Monkton.
Eat shit bitchIf he wants the funds for his research well you get the point and maybe not.
global warming is by far the most politically charged of all and who gains the most with faulty data? The one whose pushing green across America.
What faulty data? Present links, or shut the fuck up. Links from real scientists, not frauds like Watts and Monkton.
An animated analysis of the IPCC AR5 graph shows ?IPCC analysis methodology and computer models are seriously flawed? | Watts Up With That?
LOL. And these scientists are up in the Arctic, melting the ice caps and glaciers with blowtorches, right?
Show me peer reviewed articles that present evidence that the global warming we can see right on the mountain glaciers visible from Portland, Oregon is not real. People like you flap-yap about science, and have no idea how science works.
god damn idiot that's all your ever going to be.
The caps have gained ice imagine that.
Sure, Rabble, sure. When you have no evidence, lie.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.arctic.png
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png
Eat shit bitchWhat faulty data? Present links, or shut the fuck up. Links from real scientists, not frauds like Watts and Monkton.
An animated analysis of the IPCC AR5 graph shows ?IPCC analysis methodology and computer models are seriously flawed? | Watts Up With That?
Watt is an ex-TV weatherman with no degree in anything at all. A proven liar.
There you go with the skewed political motivated science data.
There you go with the skewed political motivated science data.
there you go with the skewed political motivated science data.
you'd be a real hero to the denialists here if you could post one legitimate scientific theory that suggests that there is something other than agw that results from increasing atmospheric ghg concentrations.
There you go with the skewed political motivated science data.
Like those 'skewed' polls prior to 6Nov13
there you go with the skewed political motivated science data.
you'd be a real hero to the denialists here if you could post one legitimate scientific theory that suggests that there is something other than agw that results from increasing atmospheric ghg concentrations.
you would do great to post a scientific theory that was not skewed that support global warming. Years ago science said the ice age was returning.
you'd be a real hero to the denialists here if you could post one legitimate scientific theory that suggests that there is something other than agw that results from increasing atmospheric ghg concentrations.
you would do great to post a scientific theory that was not skewed that support global warming. Years ago science said the ice age was returning.
No, it did not. That you post that old lie simply indictates how enormously ignorant that you are.
What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?
Ice age predicted in the 70s
"[M]any publications now claiming the world is on the brink of a global warming disaster said the same about an impending ice age just 30 years ago. Several major ones, including The New York Times, Time magazine and Newsweek, have reported on three or even four different climate shifts since 1895." (Fire and Ice)
In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call aerosols emitted by human activities into the atmosphere also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, its become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.
At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.
By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.
There you go with the skewed political motivated science data.
Like those 'skewed' polls prior to 6Nov13
News flash climate change is real it done it for billions of years.
The earth is not warming it's cooling and in years to come it will again warm.
Mid-evil heat wave ring a bell?
willful ignorance would be you stop posting skewed data.Like those 'skewed' polls prior to 6Nov13
News flash climate change is real it done it for billions of years.
The earth is not warming it's cooling and in years to come it will again warm.
Mid-evil heat wave ring a bell?
News flash for really dumb fucks that revel in their willfull ignorance. We have had several very rapid warming events driven by the rapid increase in atmospheric GHGs in the geologic past. They were also known as extinction events.
World's biggest extinction event: Massive volcanic eruption, burning coal and accelerated greenhouse gas choked out life
Grasby and colleagues discovered layers of coal ash in rocks from the extinction boundary in Canada's High Arctic that give the first direct proof to support this and have published their findings in Nature Geoscience.
Unlike end of dinosaurs, 65 million years ago, where there is widespread belief that the impact of a meteorite was at least the partial cause, it is unclear what caused the late Permian extinction. Previous researchers have suggested massive volcanic eruptions through coal beds in Siberia would generate significant greenhouse gases causing run away global warming.
"Our research is the first to show direct evidence that massive volcanic eruptions -- the largest the world has ever witnessed -caused massive coal combustion thus supporting models for significant generation of greenhouse gases at this time," says Grasby.
you would do great to post a scientific theory that was not skewed that support global warming. Years ago science said the ice age was returning.
No, it did not. That you post that old lie simply indictates how enormously ignorant that you are.
What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?
Ice age predicted in the 70s
"[M]any publications now claiming the world is on the brink of a global warming disaster said the same about an impending ice age just 30 years ago. Several major ones, including The New York Times, Time magazine and Newsweek, have reported on three or even four different climate shifts since 1895." (Fire and Ice)
In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call aerosols emitted by human activities into the atmosphere also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, its become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.
At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.
By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.
I was 15 years old and it was in the news everywhere you are not allowed to reinvent the past to support your failed agenda NOW. Not with someone who was alive then anyway.
No, it did not. That you post that old lie simply indictates how enormously ignorant that you are.
What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?
Ice age predicted in the 70s
"[M]any publications now claiming the world is on the brink of a global warming disaster said the same about an impending ice age just 30 years ago. Several major ones, including The New York Times, Time magazine and Newsweek, have reported on three or even four different climate shifts since 1895." (Fire and Ice)
In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call aerosols emitted by human activities into the atmosphere also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, its become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.
At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.
By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.
I was 15 years old and it was in the news everywhere you are not allowed to reinvent the past to support your failed agenda NOW. Not with someone who was alive then anyway.
Yes, silly ass. You were 15 and reading Newsweek and Time. At that time I was more than double your age, and reading papers published by the National Academy of Science.
http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/nas-1975.html
willful ignorance would be you stop posting skewed data.News flash climate change is real it done it for billions of years.
The earth is not warming it's cooling and in years to come it will again warm.
Mid-evil heat wave ring a bell?
News flash for really dumb fucks that revel in their willfull ignorance. We have had several very rapid warming events driven by the rapid increase in atmospheric GHGs in the geologic past. They were also known as extinction events.
World's biggest extinction event: Massive volcanic eruption, burning coal and accelerated greenhouse gas choked out life
Grasby and colleagues discovered layers of coal ash in rocks from the extinction boundary in Canada's High Arctic that give the first direct proof to support this and have published their findings in Nature Geoscience.
Unlike end of dinosaurs, 65 million years ago, where there is widespread belief that the impact of a meteorite was at least the partial cause, it is unclear what caused the late Permian extinction. Previous researchers have suggested massive volcanic eruptions through coal beds in Siberia would generate significant greenhouse gases causing run away global warming.
"Our research is the first to show direct evidence that massive volcanic eruptions -- the largest the world has ever witnessed -caused massive coal combustion thus supporting models for significant generation of greenhouse gases at this time," says Grasby.
