More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[Abraham3]

From your article:

"In the largest effort to date to document global warming dissent in the scientific community, 31,486 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,029 PhD, 7,157 MS, 2,586 MD and DVM, and 12,714 BS or equivalent - have signed on with the Global Warming Petition Project to state “the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity.”"

So, your statement and that of your source, the renowned Canadian Free Press, that "30,000 SCIENTISTS" disagree with AGW, would be a blatant LIE. A scientist is someone who does research. Having a degree at some level in a science-related field is no guarantee whatsoever that one is doing research. A more accurate description would be 30,000 people with college degrees.

The consensus in question, as one would admit were one interested in the truth, is among CLIMATE SCIENTISTS. There, the rate of acceptance of AGW as valid is, as has been repeatedly stated, 97%.

 

[skookerasbil]

One thing that is clearly established is that the climate science folks with obsessive-compulsive disorder invariably cite the extreme #'s in the models. Invariably. These people are always, always presenting the loaded data, this the term, "alarmism".

This graph is instructive >>>




Global Warming is REAL but NOT a Big DEAL | Watts Up With That?



But anyone looking at this must ask themselves, "Why do these people insist on presenting ONLY the extreme #'s in the models?".


Here is exactly why.........and its all about connecting the dots!!! People have to understand that the hard core AGW people in here have zero interest in connecting the dots. They will cling to the established AGW narrative to the day they go in their box. Have to ask yourself, "Why?"



The Green Agenda

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

From your article:

"In the largest effort to date to document global warming dissent in the scientific community, 31,486 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,029 PhD, 7,157 MS, 2,586 MD and DVM, and 12,714 BS or equivalent - have signed on with the Global Warming Petition Project to state “the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity.”"

So, your statement and that of your source, the renowned Canadian Free Press, that "30,000 SCIENTISTS" disagree with AGW, would be a blatant LIE. A scientist is someone who does research. Having a degree at some level in a science-related field is no guarantee whatsoever that one is doing research. A more accurate description would be 30,000 people with college degrees.

The consensus in question, as one would admit were one interested in the truth, is among CLIMATE SCIENTISTS. There, the rate of acceptance of AGW as valid is, as has been repeatedly stated, 97%.

97% was how many out of how many?

 

[orogenicman]

One thing that is clearly established is that the climate science folks with obsessive-compulsive disorder invariably cite the extreme #'s in the models. Invariably. These people are always, always presenting the loaded data, this the term, "alarmism".

This graph is instructive >>>




Global Warming is REAL but NOT a Big DEAL | Watts Up With That?



But anyone looking at this must ask themselves, "Why do these people insist on presenting ONLY the extreme #'s in the models?".


Here is exactly why.........and its all about connecting the dots!!! People have to understand that the hard core AGW people in here have zero interest in connecting the dots. They will cling to the established AGW narrative to the day they go in their box. Have to ask yourself, "Why?"



The Green Agenda

Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

#3 - It's not bad (no big deal).

Predictable.

 

[bripat9643]

From your article:

"In the largest effort to date to document global warming dissent in the scientific community, 31,486 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,029 PhD, 7,157 MS, 2,586 MD and DVM, and 12,714 BS or equivalent - have signed on with the Global Warming Petition Project to state “the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity.”"

So, your statement and that of your source, the renowned Canadian Free Press, that "30,000 SCIENTISTS" disagree with AGW, would be a blatant LIE. A scientist is someone who does research. Having a degree at some level in a science-related field is no guarantee whatsoever that one is doing research. A more accurate description would be 30,000 people with college degrees.

The consensus in question, as one would admit were one interested in the truth, is among CLIMATE SCIENTISTS. There, the rate of acceptance of AGW as valid is, as has been repeatedly stated, 97%.

They 97% figure is horseshit. It's been proven over and over again in this forum.

 

[orogenicman]

From your article:

"In the largest effort to date to document global warming dissent in the scientific community, 31,486 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,029 PhD, 7,157 MS, 2,586 MD and DVM, and 12,714 BS or equivalent - have signed on with the Global Warming Petition Project to state “the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity.”"

So, your statement and that of your source, the renowned Canadian Free Press, that "30,000 SCIENTISTS" disagree with AGW, would be a blatant LIE. A scientist is someone who does research. Having a degree at some level in a science-related field is no guarantee whatsoever that one is doing research. A more accurate description would be 30,000 people with college degrees.

The consensus in question, as one would admit were one interested in the truth, is among CLIMATE SCIENTISTS. There, the rate of acceptance of AGW as valid is, as has been repeatedly stated, 97%.

They 97% figure is horseshit. It's been proven over and over again in this forum.

What has been proven over and over again is that your use of that picture for your avatar amounts to child abuse.

 

[gnarlylove]

They 97% figure is horseshit. It's been proven over and over again in this forum.

Yep. Saying 97% of peer reviewed journals don't exist doesn't mean they don't exist. Just joking. What it really says is you believe what you say! Yep, most people do, what's new?

I've heard and read from independent sources, not just posters on here, that this figure is reliable. PhD professors affirm this rate as accurate. My local news paper, out of all dinky papers, published the same fact: 97%. See here for one source, Bob McCollister former PhD at Ohio State, my high school teacher (who I didnt think supported global warming: Global Warming? | The Tribune

Ninety-seven percent of the scientific studies that have been published on the subject agree that global warming is very real.

“So there is no scientific debate the global climate is undoubtedly getting warmer. If you were to take all of the scientists who study the climate who don’t subscribe to global warming and put them in my classroom, you’d have a bunch of empty chairs.”

What has been proven over and over again is that your use of that picture for your avatar amounts to child abuse.

it is indoctrination without self-representation--the worst kind. Foisted upon the child as the proper behavior. In adults, such religious zealously towards sports inculcates the same rigors of thought: none--have faith and keep repeating slogans till your team wins and all your lying the previous years is validated. But if you're team never comes up, profess it till you die. Stick by your team (or beliefs) NO MATTER what reality says. Make adjustments to reality so that reality can only support your beliefs, and thus no matter what YOU ALWAYS WIN (at heart and that's all that matters to some).

Sports and Repubs go hand in hand: loyalty over reality. (this is confirmed by pyschologists that repubs are much less open to experience then dems and hence place higher value on loyalty rather than learning something new--see Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives | Video on TED.com) but please don't take from this that I'm pro-democrat. They offer as many solutions as repubs: >1

Too bad reality doesn't care what we think, otherwise global warming would have been stopped by sheer dissension years ago. The fact remains the earth is warming and is explained by various factors but has much ado about humanity as the major source of CO2 and CH4.

Earlier this year the United Nations released a study providing evidence that the previous decade, which spanned from 2001-2010, was the hottest decade in recorded history. The average worldwide land and sea temperature of 58 degrees surpassed the previous decadal high of 57.2 set in the 1990s.

“And the previous high before that was set in the ‘80s,” McCollister said.

 

[orogenicman]

They 97% figure is horseshit. It's been proven over and over again in this forum.

Yep. Saying 97% of peer reviewed journals don't exist doesn't mean they don't exist. Just joking. What it really says is you believe what you say! Yep, most people do, what's new?

I've heard and read from independent sources, not just posters on here, that this figure is reliable. PhD professors affirm this rate as accurate. My local news paper, out of all dinky papers, published the same fact: 97%. See here for one source, Bob McCollister former PhD at Ohio State, my high school teacher (who I didnt think supported global warming: Global Warming? | The Tribune

Ninety-seven percent of the scientific studies that have been published on the subject agree that global warming is very real.

“So there is no scientific debate the global climate is undoubtedly getting warmer. If you were to take all of the scientists who study the climate who don’t subscribe to global warming and put them in my classroom, you’d have a bunch of empty chairs.”

What has been proven over and over again is that your use of that picture for your avatar amounts to child abuse.

it is indoctrination without self-representation--the worst kind. Foisted upon the child as the proper behavior. In adults, such religious zealously towards sports inculcates the same rigors of thought: none--have faith and keep repeating slogans till your team wins and all your lying the previous years is validated. But if you're team never comes up, profess it till you die. Stick by your team (or beliefs) NO MATTER what reality says. Make adjustments to reality so that reality can only support your beliefs, and thus no matter what YOU ALWAYS WIN (at heart and that's all that matters to some).

Sports and Repubs go hand in hand: loyalty over reality. (this is confirmed by pyschologists that repubs are much less open to experience then dems and hence place higher value on loyalty rather than learning something new--see Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives | Video on TED.com) but please don't take from this that I'm pro-democrat. They offer as many solutions as repubs: >1

Too bad reality doesn't care what we think, otherwise global warming would have been stopped by sheer dissension years ago. The fact remains the earth is warming and is explained by various factors but has much ado about humanity as the major source of CO2 and CH4.

Earlier this year the United Nations released a study providing evidence that the previous decade, which spanned from 2001-2010, was the hottest decade in recorded history. The average worldwide land and sea temperature of 58 degrees surpassed the previous decadal high of 57.2 set in the 1990s.

“And the previous high before that was set in the ‘80s,” McCollister said.

Yeah, but skooterasshat says it doesn't matter because all the plants are singing kumbaya over all that extra CO2.

 

[skookerasbil]

One thing that is clearly established is that the climate science folks with obsessive-compulsive disorder invariably cite the extreme #'s in the models. Invariably. These people are always, always presenting the loaded data, this the term, "alarmism".

This graph is instructive >>>




Global Warming is REAL but NOT a Big DEAL | Watts Up With That?



But anyone looking at this must ask themselves, "Why do these people insist on presenting ONLY the extreme #'s in the models?".


Here is exactly why.........and its all about connecting the dots!!! People have to understand that the hard core AGW people in here have zero interest in connecting the dots. They will cling to the established AGW narrative to the day they go in their box. Have to ask yourself, "Why?"



The Green Agenda

Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

#3 - It's not bad (no big deal).

Predictable.

Nah.....we're just of the opinion that its a bit much to start throwing ourselves off of 200 foot cliffs due to a smidge bump in temperatures like the AGW OCD's!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

epic


look at the post counts of the other threads!!! Laughable.........laughable. Nothing to look at there apparently!!

 

[skookerasbil]

almost forgot..........

 

[flacaltenn]

They 97% figure is horseshit. It's been proven over and over again in this forum.

Yep. Saying 97% of peer reviewed journals don't exist doesn't mean they don't exist. Just joking. What it really says is you believe what you say! Yep, most people do, what's new?

I've heard and read from independent sources, not just posters on here, that this figure is reliable. PhD professors affirm this rate as accurate. My local news paper, out of all dinky papers, published the same fact: 97%. See here for one source, Bob McCollister former PhD at Ohio State, my high school teacher (who I didnt think supported global warming: Global Warming? | The Tribune

Ninety-seven percent of the scientific studies that have been published on the subject agree that global warming is very real.

“So there is no scientific debate the global climate is undoubtedly getting warmer. If you were to take all of the scientists who study the climate who don’t subscribe to global warming and put them in my classroom, you’d have a bunch of empty chairs.”

What has been proven over and over again is that your use of that picture for your avatar amounts to child abuse.

it is indoctrination without self-representation--the worst kind. Foisted upon the child as the proper behavior. In adults, such religious zealously towards sports inculcates the same rigors of thought: none--have faith and keep repeating slogans till your team wins and all your lying the previous years is validated. But if you're team never comes up, profess it till you die. Stick by your team (or beliefs) NO MATTER what reality says. Make adjustments to reality so that reality can only support your beliefs, and thus no matter what YOU ALWAYS WIN (at heart and that's all that matters to some).

Sports and Repubs go hand in hand: loyalty over reality. (this is confirmed by pyschologists that repubs are much less open to experience then dems and hence place higher value on loyalty rather than learning something new--see Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives | Video on TED.com) but please don't take from this that I'm pro-democrat. They offer as many solutions as repubs: >1

Too bad reality doesn't care what we think, otherwise global warming would have been stopped by sheer dissension years ago. The fact remains the earth is warming and is explained by various factors but has much ado about humanity as the major source of CO2 and CH4.

Earlier this year the United Nations released a study providing evidence that the previous decade, which spanned from 2001-2010, was the hottest decade in recorded history. The average worldwide land and sea temperature of 58 degrees surpassed the previous decadal high of 57.2 set in the 1990s.

“And the previous high before that was set in the ‘80s,” McCollister said.

Nope.. You "dinky little newspaper" committed dinky shoddy journalism. You cannot do a statistical survey and count "no opinion expressed" as whatever you want it to be. The 97% bullshit is because the SMALL NUMBER of Journal articles that EXPRESSED an opinion are being misinterpreted as the conscience of ALL the participants. You do not poll on NSA spying and interpret the "no opinions" as either FOR or AGAINST. The VAST majority of journal articles reviewed HAD NO OPINION expressed. Which is encouraging -- because it's a shitty idea to LOOK for opinion in a science journal article in the first place.

Any one who doesn't QUALIFY the findings as "97% of climate journal articles THAT EXPRESSED an opinion supported GW" ---- is perpetrating a lie..

And THEN -- you have to look at the criteria for even THAT statement. Does "supporting GW warming mean that you believe the world is WARMING? Or are you making a more important definitive statement.

This is pure fresh BullShit.. And the study was done so that it COULD BE intentionally misinterpreted by "dinky little newspapers" and the religious zealots that spread the gospel. And it DOES MATTER that the zealots are lying and abusing math and science. It shows how little esteem they have for those methodologies..

So if you want to be mocked for abusing statistics and supporting the clowns at skepticalscience that are dedicated to playing on fear and ignorance --- be our guest..

 

[orogenicman]

One thing that is clearly established is that the climate science folks with obsessive-compulsive disorder invariably cite the extreme #'s in the models. Invariably. These people are always, always presenting the loaded data, this the term, "alarmism".

This graph is instructive >>>




Global Warming is REAL but NOT a Big DEAL | Watts Up With That?



But anyone looking at this must ask themselves, "Why do these people insist on presenting ONLY the extreme #'s in the models?".


Here is exactly why.........and its all about connecting the dots!!! People have to understand that the hard core AGW people in here have zero interest in connecting the dots. They will cling to the established AGW narrative to the day they go in their box. Have to ask yourself, "Why?"



The Green Agenda

Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

#3 - It's not bad (no big deal).

Predictable.

Nah.....we're just of the opinion that its a bit much to start throwing ourselves off of 200 foot cliffs due to a smidge bump in temperatures like the AGW OCD's!!!



http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/jump_from_Orkney_cliff_a8a83.jpg.html

Not to worry. I'm quite certain you will find some other reason to toss yourself off a cliff. And I'm sure your all your 'friends' will be there to give you encouragement.

 

[flacaltenn]

Jump. Jump. Jump. Jump. Jump. Hurry, Ive got to go back to work already..
Hows that OroMan? Did it work?

 

[polarbear]

epic


look at the post counts of the other threads!!! Laughable.........laughable. Nothing to look at there apparently!!

It`s beyond ridiculous..a glacier calved on Pine Island, which isn`t news but the resident AGW freaks wasted no time and posted it.

In the final analysis it`s just another computer model :

"Even if you were to reduce melt rates, you would not stop the retreat," Dr Gudmundsson told BBC News.
"We did a number of model runs where we allowed PIG to retreat some distance back, and then we lowered the melt rates in our models. And despite doing that, the grounding line continued to retreat.

If the forecasts of Dr Gudmundsson and colleagues are correct, PIG could now lead an accelerating trend.
Dr Gudmundsson cautions that computer models are simulations that carry uncertainties, and must be constrained and improved by the further infusion of real-world data.

Which isn`t something the "skepticalscience.org" subscribers want to hear, they are already freaking out (again).

What was so funny about the "infusion of real world data" was that the research vessel which attempted to do that got stuck in the ice.

 

[Kosh]

From your article:

"In the largest effort to date to document global warming dissent in the scientific community, 31,486 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,029 PhD, 7,157 MS, 2,586 MD and DVM, and 12,714 BS or equivalent - have signed on with the Global Warming Petition Project to state “the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity.”"

So, your statement and that of your source, the renowned Canadian Free Press, that "30,000 SCIENTISTS" disagree with AGW, would be a blatant LIE. A scientist is someone who does research. Having a degree at some level in a science-related field is no guarantee whatsoever that one is doing research. A more accurate description would be 30,000 people with college degrees.

The consensus in question, as one would admit were one interested in the truth, is among CLIMATE SCIENTISTS. There, the rate of acceptance of AGW as valid is, as has been repeatedly stated, 97%.

And the loyal AGW cultists will not be swayed from their religious belief.

 

[HenryBHough]

We Global Warming Athiests are in most danger of death through laughing so hard. Of course there is some of the ayatollahs of GW might learn something from their Islamist buddies. Then we might have to worry. But certainly about nothing climate might do.

 

[skookerasbil]

I gotta admit.......this forum and particularly this thread has become entertainment central for me. My evenings ( and sometimes mornings) would be decidedly suckier if these mental cases didn't show up every day to ring their tired, nutty AGW gong.......the same stale shit weve all been seeing for well over a decade now. I waste far too much time on here but dang its fun as hell......for example, when I see a new post from an angry, miserable, hysterical bozo like Rolling Thunder, I cant help but burst out laughing.......the stereotype of an near suicidal far lefty banging the shit out of his keyboard with steam pouring out of every pore if you don't agree with them........right there on a daily basis...... This mofu hasn't laughed in years!!!

.......a fucking hoot!!

 

[orogenicman]

I gotta admit.......this forum and particularly this thread has become entertainment central for me. My evenings ( and sometimes mornings) would be decidedly suckier if these mental cases didn't show up every day to ring their tired, nutty AGW gong.......the same stale shit weve all been seeing for well over a decade now. I waste far too much time on here but dang its fun as hell......for example, when I see a new post from an angry, miserable, hysterical bozo like Rolling Thunder, I cant help but burst out laughing.......the stereotype of an near suicidal far lefty banging the shit out of his keyboard with steam pouring out of every pore if you don't agree with them........right there on a daily basis...... This mofu hasn't laughed in years!!!

.......a fucking hoot!!

I take it you are missing your former residence. You have my sympathy.

 

[skookerasbil]

I gotta admit.......this forum and particularly this thread has become entertainment central for me. My evenings ( and sometimes mornings) would be decidedly suckier if these mental cases didn't show up every day to ring their tired, nutty AGW gong.......the same stale shit weve all been seeing for well over a decade now. I waste far too much time on here but dang its fun as hell......for example, when I see a new post from an angry, miserable, hysterical bozo like Rolling Thunder, I cant help but burst out laughing.......the stereotype of an near suicidal far lefty banging the shit out of his keyboard with steam pouring out of every pore if you don't agree with them........right there on a daily basis...... This mofu hasn't laughed in years!!!

.......a fucking hoot!!

I take it you are missing your former residence. You have my sympathy.

s0n.....you're another of the AGW climate crusaders with connect the dots issues.


I'll take the psych ward and Obama's Energy Information Agency projections ftw while the intellectuals visit Disney!!!

















Like Ive said.......global warming in 2014 is nothing more than an internet hobby for discussion as relevant as anything in the Conspiracy Forum.