More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[PMZ]

You realize that 95-0 is not a win for your side?

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

So now it's just a matter of ousting Obama, Holder, Sebelius, Pelosi, Reid, Hillary Clinton, and others listed here: 10 most corrupt politicians in America.

Obama only apologized for "misspeaking," which is a euphemism for lying about knowing ahead of time that tens of millions of Americans would lose their present insurance coverage, so he could swoop in, be a hero, and "save" the system in order to institute his failed unaffordable care act named as "affordable," only to fool his constituents and heist other Americans to double their coverage to make up the slack he knew the government could not afford.

It's kind of like telling Israel he would support them while at the same time he secretly lifted the Iran sanctions. Now, where we had an ally, we have a very angry Netanyahu Obama snubs every time he gets a chance.

Obama is dysfunctional, because he lets his personal loyalty to foreign interests get in the way of American interests and treaties we have to honor on account of the liabilities his friends inflicted on the world in WWII.

He needs to be replaced immediately by someone who is friend to America and America's friends.

If his behavior hasn't extended his mentor's thesis of "God damn America," I don't know what else could more have effectively done that that how he misconducts America's interests to its detriment.

He's actually spit on his oath of office on a nearly daily basis like a criminal spits on any law that gets in his way of attaining other people's possessions.

He's now dispossessed 52,000,000 Americans from their health insurance providers in order to have the Federal Government take over 1/6th of the Nation's economy. Obama's rule has been America's worst horror flick.

Let's see. We have the actual indisputable results of conservatism under Bush, vs your recital of 100% pure Republican propaganda designed with only one objective in mind. To sell that America has degenerated to the point that it deserves nothing better than Republicanism, and Democrats, believe it or not, are even less competent than Republicans.

The lyrics of losers.

Keep it up. You are campaigning for the cleanest sweep of congressional detrius ever. The final flushing of conservatism.

 

[Abraham3]

Have you noticed that she doesn't really seem overly fond of elections?

 

[PhoenixOneUK]

I found many people confuse the issue of climate change and man damaging the environment as same thing. They are not.

In early 1970s, it was alleged that man was responsible for global freezing, which created a bit of a panic amongst some people. Now it is global warming.

The issue is complex, and there are many variables to consider. This in itself should tell us something. Moving forward we find the entire matter rests with computer model. Well, I have been working with computers for over 30 years, and do not think it wrong to state I would also qualified to challenge claims made. That being, if the data/information is flawed then so too will be any and ALL conclusions derived from it. No ifs, buts, or what have you. Note this is just on the data/information contained therein without even considering the accuracy of computer (hardware) model (software) itself. Any software developer worth his/her salt should and would know this. Further, the matter was actually challenged in a British court of law that IPPC lost for very reasons I mention here.

For what it is worth, the above is my opinion.

 

[flacaltenn]

I found many people confuse the issue of climate change and man damaging the environment as same thing. They are not.

In early 1970s, it was alleged that man was responsible for global freezing, which created a bit of a panic amongst some people. Now it is global warming.

The issue is complex, and there are many variables to consider. This in itself should tell us something. Moving forward we find the entire matter rests with computer model. Well, I have been working with computers for over 30 years, and do not think it wrong to state I would also qualified to challenge claims made. That being, if the data/information is flawed then so too will be any and ALL conclusions derived from it. No ifs, buts, or what have you. Note this is just on the data/information contained therein without even considering the accuracy of computer (hardware) model (software) itself. Any software developer worth his/her salt should and would know this. Further, the matter was actually challenged in a British court of law that IPPC lost for very reasons I mention here.

For what it is worth, the above is my opinion.

Welcome to the forum. Opinions welcomed. Facts disputed. Fist fights occasionally. Its educational and entertaining on occasion..

 

[RollingThunder]

This whole troll generated thread amounts to more (and more and more) "proof" that the so-called "skeptics" are actually just 'very ignorant, totally clueless and extremely bamboozled denier cult retards'. Fools like that who reject the scientific evidence and the testimony of the world scientific community in favor of their rightwingnut political beliefs wind up as pathetic stooges for the fossil fuel industry and their posts show that they are too brainwashed and ignorant about science to be able to comprehend the actual issues or what is at stake.

 

[freedombecki]

So now it's just a matter of ousting Obama, Holder, Sebelius, Pelosi, Reid, Hillary Clinton, and others listed here: 10 most corrupt politicians in America.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

Judicial Watch is primarily funded by three extremely conservative foundations: the Sarah Scaife Foundation, The Carthage Foundation and the John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. So do not even pretend to think that their opinions are objective or lacking in political partisanship.

If you want to "oust" those people, you might want to talk to the people who elected them. And you might want to use terms more appropriate to a democracy, like "vote". When you say "oust", it's hard not to picture a coup d'etat. Is that what you're actually suggesting?

Obama only apologized for "misspeaking," which is a euphemism for lying about knowing ahead of time that tens of millions of Americans would lose their present insurance coverage, so he could swoop in, be a hero, and "save" the system in order to institute his failed unaffordable care act named as "affordable," only to fool his constituents and heist other Americans to double their coverage to make up the slack he knew the government could not afford.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

I've been reading a number of stories that find people who claim their insurance costs have gone up simply haven't done their homework; that when folks look in to their situations, it's found that better insurance is available for less money. And a large portion of the people losing their policies are simply suffering from insurance companies attempting to increase their profits by conning these people into buying more expensive policies, often by telling them outright lies. Again, you can hardly credit your sources with objectivity. If you can find a leading Republican trying to honestly discover how PPACA is working, I'll eat his hat.



This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

Pardon me, but screw Netanyahu. He's not in charge of our foreign policy. The president is. And the sanctions that Obama eased, Obama put into effect. He did so after the election of an actual reformer. If the president is not to be allowed to make use of both sticks and carrots in his dealings with other nations, you might as well eliminate the office.



This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

The president has no personal loyalty towards foreign interests and is not "friends" with those who caused World War II.

Your statements are absurdist hyperbole.



This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

"Immediately"? ? ? So... you're not willing to wait till the end of his term? I think maybe you've lost track of what it means to be an American. You've forgotten the Constitution and the rule of law.



This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

I do. You.

He's actually spit on his oath of office on a nearly daily basis like a criminal spits on any law that gets in his way of attaining other people's possessions.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

You need to stop spitting on the Constitution and read the thing cause you've got some serious misunderstandings in its regard.

He's now dispossessed 52,000,000 Americans from their health insurance providers in order to have the Federal Government take over 1/6th of the Nation's economy. Obama's rule has been America's worst horror flick.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

This statement is wrong on every count. The number of individuals who've found their policies didn't meet the new minimums is nowhere near that number. And of those, the majority will be getting better policies for less money. When PPACA was passed, 45 million Americans had NO medical insurance. The federal government has not taken over health care - they are forcing Americans to make use of COMMERCIAL health insurance in order to obtain COMMERCIAL medical care.

This is the ENVIRONMENT forum. This post is off-topic.

Sorry, but when another poster introduces a different subject "Obama and the Congress," you should have gone after THAT poster first.

Shame on you, Abraham! This forum requires that you jump on the first poster who introduced the topic, not the second. You will be receiving a reminder from me if you ever fail to do that again.

Oh, and don't throw trash out the thread's window. It dirties the road to nowhere.

 

[freedombecki]

Have you noticed that she doesn't really seem overly fond of elections?

What elections? You mean those faux voting booths run by the Union Goonie precinct chairpersons who always manage to get lefties elected in marginal districts where popcorn polls show something amiss?

Even the polls are being polluted! And not by righties, either!

 

[freedombecki]

This whole troll generated thread amounts to more (and more and more) "proof" that the so-called "skeptics" are actually just 'very ignorant, totally clueless and extremely bamboozled denier cult retards'. Fools like that who reject the scientific evidence and the testimony of the world scientific community in favor of their rightwingnut political beliefs wind up as pathetic stooges for the fossil fuel industry and their posts show that they are too brainwashed and ignorant about science to be able to comprehend the actual issues or what is at stake.

Wassamatteryou? Righties on a diet of truth while so-called scientists are bumping hundreds of years' of weather measurement to show the world is about to catch on fire from man's alleged abuse of the environment?

[ame=http://youtu.be/BPtuekvJdhs]Insane Baby Laughter - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[mamooth]

In early 1970s, it was alleged that man was responsible for global freezing, which created a bit of a panic amongst some people. Now it is global warming.

Not a good start for you, parroting denialist urban legends. Back in the real world, most scientists in the 1970s were already predicting warming.

(And please don't embarrass yourself by posting a Time Magazine cover.)

Moving forward we find the entire matter rests with computer model.

Incorrect again. Even if no computer model existed, the warming would still be there. Warming can be measured with things called "thermometers". Talking about models is a red herring.

Now, results matter, and those models make damn good results. The whole field of climate science has been making correct predictions for decades running now, which is why it has such credibility. When your side has a track record just as good, you'll also get that kind of respect and credibility. But since your side doesn't even have the guts to make any predictions at all, that's not likely to happen.

Further, the matter was actually challenged in a British court of law that IPPC lost for very reasons I mention here.

Say what? The IPCC lost in British court? Are you getting confused with that urban legend about Al Gore's movie and the British court?

 

[westwall]

Nor a loss. Kyoto is not sustainable energy. Just one proposal to alot responsibility to different economic systems, the impact of their culpability, and their responsibility to mitigate future impacts and establish a path forward that will lower the total economic impact of past actions on future results. Lots of options.

We will evolve to sustainable energy in time. We will do the responsible thing. We will do our share.

First, we will rid the government of dysfunctional pretenders.

Dysfunctional pretenders? You mean like the majority of progressive's?

No, deniers of science.

Yeah, you progressives. That's your MO. You deny science AND more importantly the scientific method. That's why you are constantly shifting the goalposts AND trying to rewrite the null hypothesis methodology.

 

[flacaltenn]

I see you met the major deniers already... their asses have been kicked so far, they get freq flyer points.

You can show them 20 articles in the media from the 70s declaring a ccoming ice age and they will DENY that truth and try to claim that all the fuss came from just 2 science papers. Or that the judge in the Brit Gore case found no issues with his "work"

No way anyone can compete with level of complete denial.

 

[RollingThunder]

This whole troll generated thread amounts to more (and more and more) "proof" that the so-called "skeptics" are actually just 'very ignorant, totally clueless and extremely bamboozled denier cult retards'. Fools like that who reject the scientific evidence and the testimony of the world scientific community in favor of their rightwingnut political beliefs wind up as pathetic stooges for the fossil fuel industry and their posts show that they are too brainwashed and ignorant about science to be able to comprehend the actual issues or what is at stake.

Wassamatteryou? Righties on a diet of truth while so-called scientists are bumping hundreds of years' of weather measurement to show the world is about to catch on fire from man's alleged abuse of the environment?

Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention that the denier cultists are severely delusional and very anti-science. Thanks for reminding me, Foolbecki.

"Righties on a diet of truth" - hilariously delusional when referring to a bunch of anti-science hoodwinked retards.

"so-called scientists" - yeah, like virtually the entire world scientific community.

"bumping hundreds of years' of weather measurement" - Isn't it amazing how, just by supposedly altering some temperature records (denier cult myth #4), scientists have somehow made all that ice melt - Arctic ice cap, Greenland, Antarctica, mountain glaciers - and also somehow raised sea levels, warmed the oceans, changed seasonal timing, raised atmospheric water vapor levels by 4%, and changed the Earth's energy balance as measured at the top of the atmosphere.

You denier cultists are soooooo gullible. You fall for the lies your political puppet masters tell you and never bother to look at the testimony of the world's experts on this, the actual climate scientists.

 

[skookerasbil]

lmao.......top story on DRUDGE today.........and another sack burn for the k00ks...........

Remember just 2 or 3 years ago, every climate crusader nutter in here was throwing bombs about the tornado's being out of control due to global warming???!!!


2013 a tranquil year for tornadoes so far



the sack burnings in here continue. More k00k losing!!!

Rolling Thunder in particular was yapping wildly about the whole tornado thing........calling everybody and their brother "retard" if they didn't embrace the whole end of the world tornado scenario!!




Who's not winning?

 

[PMZ]

I found many people confuse the issue of climate change and man damaging the environment as same thing. They are not.

In early 1970s, it was alleged that man was responsible for global freezing, which created a bit of a panic amongst some people. Now it is global warming.

The issue is complex, and there are many variables to consider. This in itself should tell us something. Moving forward we find the entire matter rests with computer model. Well, I have been working with computers for over 30 years, and do not think it wrong to state I would also qualified to challenge claims made. That being, if the data/information is flawed then so too will be any and ALL conclusions derived from it. No ifs, buts, or what have you. Note this is just on the data/information contained therein without even considering the accuracy of computer (hardware) model (software) itself. Any software developer worth his/her salt should and would know this. Further, the matter was actually challenged in a British court of law that IPPC qlost for very reasons I mention here.

For what it is worth, the above is my opinion.

There is zero science that predicts a response to higher concentrations of atmospheric GHGs other than global warming. Zero. It's a certainty.

The only uncertainty is how long, for any given concentration, it will take before the energy excess, between incoming and outgoing radiation , takes, transferring between various media, before a new, stable climactic temperature is reached. Ice, water, land and atmosphere play a role. It might be a year or ten years. That's what math models are trying to predict now.

Also various tipping points where a small increase in climactic temperature causes a larger change.

No equivocation. No uncertainty other than magnitude.

That’s science.

Then there's politics spinning the reality of science into all kinds of mythology.

The politics will spin for decades. Science will only move towards more precision over longer terms.

None of this is my opinion. Merely reality.

 

[PMZ]

Have you noticed that she doesn't really seem overly fond of elections?

What elections? You mean those faux voting booths run by the Union Goonie precinct chairpersons who always manage to get lefties elected in marginal districts where popcorn polls show something amiss?

Even the polls are being polluted! And not by righties, either!

Here's a magnificent boogeyman.

 

[PMZ]

This whole troll generated thread amounts to more (and more and more) "proof" that the so-called "skeptics" are actually just 'very ignorant, totally clueless and extremely bamboozled denier cult retards'. Fools like that who reject the scientific evidence and the testimony of the world scientific community in favor of their rightwingnut political beliefs wind up as pathetic stooges for the fossil fuel industry and their posts show that they are too brainwashed and ignorant about science to be able to comprehend the actual issues or what is at stake.

Wassamatteryou? Righties on a diet of truth while so-called scientists are bumping hundreds of years' of weather measurement to show the world is about to catch on fire from man's alleged abuse of the environment?

[ame=http://youtu.be/BPtuekvJdhs]Insane Baby Laughter - YouTube[/ame]​

Science defines truth. Not righties or lefties. It has.

The difference between lefties and righties is acceptance (lefties) 0r denial (righties) of the truth that there is no doubt about.

 

[PMZ]

Dysfunctional pretenders? You mean like the majority of progressive's?

No, deniers of science.

Yeah, you progressives. That's your MO. You deny science AND more importantly the scientific method. That's why you are constantly shifting the goalposts AND trying to rewrite the null hypothesis methodology.

This is a typical statement of political position. No relation to the science. The science is unequivocal. The politics is what prejudiced people wish was true.

 

[westwall]

No, deniers of science.

Yeah, you progressives. That's your MO. You deny science AND more importantly the scientific method. That's why you are constantly shifting the goalposts AND trying to rewrite the null hypothesis methodology.

This is a typical statement of political position. No relation to the science. The science is unequivocal. The politics is what prejudiced people wish was true.

You make a retarded statement like that and expect us to take you seriously!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Kh7nLplWo]What A Maroon! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PMZ]

Yeah, you progressives. That's your MO. You deny science AND more importantly the scientific method. That's why you are constantly shifting the goalposts AND trying to rewrite the null hypothesis methodology.

This is a typical statement of political position. No relation to the science. The science is unequivocal. The politics is what prejudiced people wish was true.

You make a retarded statement like that and expect us to take you seriously!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Kh7nLplWo]What A Maroon! - YouTube[/ame]

It makes no difference to me or anyone else what you take seriously.

I take science seriously and you deny it. That says it all.

Aren't you the one who tried to tell us that microwave ovens can't work because the microwave emitter has to be warmer than what it's heating for that radiation to heat?

 

[RollingThunder]

Yeah, you progressives. That's your MO. You deny science AND more importantly the scientific method. That's why you are constantly shifting the goalposts AND trying to rewrite the null hypothesis methodology.

This is a typical statement of political position. No relation to the science. The science is unequivocal. The politics is what prejudiced people wish was true.

You make a retarded statement like that and expect us to take you seriously!

#1 - You're the retard here, walleyed.

#2 - His statement was correct. The science is unequivocal. You're just too brainwashed and retarded to comprehend that fact.

#3 - Nobody with a functioning brain takes you or the ignorant drivel you post seriously.