More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
JC....bookmark the link THE GREEN AGENDA!!!

Some laughable statements from some renowned climate change phonies.............




"We've got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.
"
- Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation


"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world
."
- Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment


Themodels are convenient fictions
that provide something very useful
.”
- Dr David Frame,
climate modeler, Oxford University


"It doesn't matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true
."
- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace


The Green Agenda







gggggggggggaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy!!!!!!!!
bump!!!

dbstealeyco2vst.png

Looky, looky BAM

Edit: And now you know why the nutjobs on here will never be able to prove their claim with an experiment. Holy Crap is that WINNING!!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
JC....bookmark the link THE GREEN AGENDA!!!

Some laughable statements from some renowned climate change phonies.............




"We've got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.
"
- Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation


"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world
."
- Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment


Themodels are convenient fictions
that provide something very useful
.”
- Dr David Frame,
climate modeler, Oxford University


"It doesn't matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true
."
- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace


The Green Agenda







gggggggggggaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy!!!!!!!!
bump!!!

dbstealeyco2vst.png

Looky, looky BAM

Edit: And now you know why the nutjobs on here will never be able to prove their claim with an experiment. Holy Crap is that WINNING!!!!!!!
What????
No CO2 induced warming????

How dare you put up the truth!!!! :udaman:
 
Toy Metrics


Let's look at two articles of civilization which can be re-oriented for active dialogue about environmentalism politics: the chainsaw and the water-gun.

A chainsaw is an electric device that rotates a circular jagged cutting blade with gears and is used to cut down trees very efficiently.

A water-gun is a toy replica gun that shoots water instead of bullets and is popular among youngsters interested in creating combat simulation games (especially in the summer months).

Since the chainsaw is used to tear down trees, and the water-gun shoots natural water, both can be referenced allegorically for ecology debate.

"Would you use a chainsaw to destroy a tree-house?"

"Would you advocate a large-scale water-gun fight on Earth Day?"


Depending on how radical your view is, we can use such articles to at least put forward arguments that offer counter-points to the notion that there will NEVER be enough evidence of global warming.




:arrow:

The Anarchist Cookbook - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


flame.jpeg
 
Toy Metrics


Let's look at two articles of civilization which can be re-oriented for active dialogue about environmentalism politics: the chainsaw and the water-gun.

A chainsaw is an electric device that rotates a circular jagged cutting blade with gears and is used to cut down trees very efficiently.

A water-gun is a toy replica gun that shoots water instead of bullets and is popular among youngsters interested in creating combat simulation games (especially in the summer months).

Since the chainsaw is used to tear down trees, and the water-gun shoots natural water, both can be referenced allegorically for ecology debate.

"Would you use a chainsaw to destroy a tree-house?"

"Would you advocate a large-scale water-gun fight on Earth Day?"


Depending on how radical your view is, we can use such articles to at least put forward arguments that offer counter-points to the notion that there will NEVER be enough evidence of global warming.




:arrow:

The Anarchist Cookbook - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


View attachment 33700
When the earth fails to warm.. what do warmits do? Create more heat! BY USING FOSSIL FUELS!
 
Might be accepted if so many of their gay predictions didn't fall flat on their faces!! But they persist with the bomb throwing predictions.......never did get that strategy?? They might as well blow their own faces off with a shotty......we've all heard them........mega hurricanes.......mega snow........no snow........tornado angst........arctic ice disappearance fail.......extreme weather bs........

Its pretty damn fascinating when you think about it.......
 
Might be accepted if so many of their gay predictions didn't fall flat on their faces!! But they persist with the bomb throwing predictions.......never did get that strategy?? They might as well blow their own faces off with a shotty......we've all heard them........mega hurricanes.......mega snow........no snow........tornado angst........arctic ice disappearance fail.......extreme weather bs........

Its pretty damn fascinating when you think about it.......
With all that fear mongering you would think they would have had all the unalienable rights seized.

Its actually pretty sad. the communists have tried by force, now by lies, they will again try force when they are fully found out to be the liars they are. its very close now..
 
Last edited:
The Guardian just published its Pre-Approved Copy of the next batch of fear-mongering from the UN and EPA. On Page two they give high homage to one of their original liars. At the bottom of page 2 of the SYR is the following:

"This report is dedicated to the memory of Stephen H. Schneider 1945 – 2010"

His famous quote is:

we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.

Lying by these people is acceptable. No true scientist accepts lying as acceptable.

Synthesis Report Home
 
The UN takes a hit from within....

New Zealand-based Terry Dunleavy, ICSC founding chairman and strategic advisor remarked, “U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon often makes unjustified statements about climate change and extreme weather. However, in their still unanswered November 29, 2012 open letter to the Secretary General, 134 scientists from across the world asserted, ‘The U.K. Met Office recently released data showing that there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 [now 18] years. During this period…carbon dioxide concentrations rose by nearly 9%…The NOAA “State of the Climate in 2008” report asserted that 15 years or more without any statistically-significant warming would indicate a discrepancy between observation and prediction. Sixteen years without warming have therefore now proven that the models are wrong by their creators’ own criterion.”

Yep even the so called consensus is now shattered..

Source
 
The UN takes a hit from within....

New Zealand-based Terry Dunleavy, ICSC founding chairman and strategic advisor remarked, “U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon often makes unjustified statements about climate change and extreme weather. However, in their still unanswered November 29, 2012 open letter to the Secretary General, 134 scientists from across the world asserted, ‘The U.K. Met Office recently released data showing that there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 [now 18] years. During this period…carbon dioxide concentrations rose by nearly 9%…The NOAA “State of the Climate in 2008” report asserted that 15 years or more without any statistically-significant warming would indicate a discrepancy between observation and prediction. Sixteen years without warming have therefore now proven that the models are wrong by their creators’ own criterion.”

Yep even the so called consensus is now shattered..

Source



And as this thread has displayed, the "consensus" isn't mattering anyway........
 
The whole CO2 crap cant be proven. Its strictly conjecture. None of the world governments are buying it and thats the only important thing. The science is nothing but a banner for the climate obsesed in 2014.......it provides some with a living and for others, a "cause" to latch on to. Look at the handful of social oddballs in here..........just people who never cut it in the formative years. Nobody ever listened to them..............and still dont listen to them. Thats why I find this place such a hoot to come to.
 
The single worst day for the climate k00ks in 20 years!!!

You wont see dick happening in terms of climate change legislation until.......ready for this......at least 2020!!! JC.....is that hysterical as all fuck??!!!

The biggest happening on Tuesday and the k00ks don't even know it.......there were a bunch of governorships won by the GOP = devastating ball kick.....something like 33 now. Hugely significant because the governors get to do all the state redistricting for national House races in 2018 = the House stays red for 6 years = no stoopid climate change regulations for 6 years!!!:2up::boobies::boobies::boobies:


epiC k00k lOsInG
 
bump. Been quiet since victory Tuesday!!
I sent Dr Archibald's graph with my mark up to some friends over at the Boulder Climactic modeling lab and asked them to refute it using unaltered data. Its not often I get a no data correlated response from them. It seems I have struck a nerve as one of them simply replied tonight "I can't refute this with unadjusted data". I replied "Then AGW is a fabrication?"
:beer:

I am still waiting for a response...:biggrin:
 
bump. Been quiet since victory Tuesday!!
I sent Dr Archibald's graph with my mark up to some friends over at the Boulder Climactic modeling lab and asked them to refute it using unaltered data. Its not often I get a no data correlated response from them. It seems I have struck a nerve as one of them simply replied tonight "I can't refute this with unadjusted data". I replied "Then AGW is a fabrication?"
:beer:

I am still waiting for a response...:biggrin:




LMAO............


:oops-28::oops-28::oops-28::oops-28::oops-28::oops-28::oops-28::poop:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top