- Thread starter
- #141
Hide the decline is your good science.
Your side admitted that they're EnviroMarxist, it's really that simple
You think "hide the decline" is an admission of "enviromarxism"? Please elaborate for us Frank
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.
Hide the decline is your good science.
Your side admitted that they're EnviroMarxist, it's really that simple
Hide the decline is your good science.
Your side admitted that they're EnviroMarxist, it's really that simple
You think "hide the decline" is an admission of "enviromarxism"? Please elaborate for us Frank
"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore..."
How many times are you going to repeat that quote Frank? Do you think there's anyone here who's not familiar with it? Do you think it accomplishes anything beyond confirming your simplistic nature?
Hide the decline is your good science.
Your side admitted that they're EnviroMarxist, it's really that simple
You think "hide the decline" is an admission of "enviromarxism"? Please elaborate for us Frank
Hide the decline is the lengths true believers will go to in order to do their part for EnviroMarxism
"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore..."
How many times are you going to repeat that quote Frank? Do you think there's anyone here who's not familiar with it? Do you think it accomplishes anything beyond confirming your simplistic nature?
Let's see, first you said the guy who said it was a low level employee at IPCC, next he was just an economist, then just speaking his own mind. You made up a new excuse with almost every post. It's important because it's the IPCC admitting exactly what they're all about: EnviroMarxism
Hide the decline is your good science.
Your side admitted that they're EnviroMarxist, it's really that simple
You think "hide the decline" is an admission of "enviromarxism"? Please elaborate for us Frank
Hide the decline is the lengths true believers will go to in order to do their part for EnviroMarxism
As we all know, "hide the decline" was what was intended to accomplish with "Mike's Nature Trick (a technique of Mann's used in an article in Nature Magazine by which instrumented data were blended with dendrochronological proxy data that, as all dendrochronologists (and anyone with any interest in climate science) know, suffered a dramatic and significant alteration in the relationship between width and temperature in the early parts of the 20th century. It was discussed by dendrochronologists in several venues prior to its appearance in the stolen email and, having been openly published in Nature was widely known in the field.
Now, as an elaboration of your charge that this somehow supports the idea that climate scientists (at least 97% of whom would qualify as your "true believers") favor enviromarxism (a term you have yet to define), you give us NOTHING.
You are a fucking ignorant fool Frank. Do yourself a favor: get an education and use it.
"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore..."
How many times are you going to repeat that quote Frank? Do you think there's anyone here who's not familiar with it? Do you think it accomplishes anything beyond confirming your simplistic nature?
Let's see, first you said the guy who said it was a low level employee at IPCC, next he was just an economist, then just speaking his own mind. You made up a new excuse with almost every post. It's important because it's the IPCC admitting exactly what they're all about: EnviroMarxism
1) Ottmar is an economist, he is NOT a climate scientist
2) He was speaking his own mind. He was being interviewed about global warming and the IPCC. He is not a permanent, salaried employee of the IPCC.
3) He was explaining how the world's governments are dealing with AGW, not the IPCC's policies
4) The IPCC has NO authority to enforce ANY behavior on ANYONE. They do not set anyone's policy
5) Your stupidity seems to be completely incurable.
it's just a factual statement of the left posted to remind you that you're full of shite."But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore..."
How many times are you going to repeat that quote Frank? Do you think there's anyone here who's not familiar with it? Do you think it accomplishes anything beyond confirming your simplistic nature?
As we all know, "hide the decline" was what was intended to accomplish with "Mike's Nature Trick (a technique of Mann's used in an article in Nature Magazine by which instrumented data were blended with dendrochronological proxy data that, as all dendrochronologists"Hide the decline is your good science.
Your side admitted that they're EnviroMarxist, it's really that simple
You think "hide the decline" is an admission of "enviromarxism"? Please elaborate for us Frank
Hide the decline is the lengths true believers will go to in order to do their part for EnviroMarxism
As we all know, "hide the decline" was what was intended to accomplish with "Mike's Nature Trick (a technique of Mann's used in an article in Nature Magazine by which instrumented data were blended with dendrochronological proxy data that, as all dendrochronologists (and anyone with any interest in climate science) know, suffered a dramatic and significant alteration in the relationship between width and temperature in the early parts of the 20th century. It was discussed by dendrochronologists in several venues prior to its appearance in the stolen email and, having been openly published in Nature was widely known in the field.
Now, as an elaboration of your charge that this somehow supports the idea that climate scientists (at least 97% of whom would qualify as your "true believers") favor enviromarxism (a term you have yet to define), you give us NOTHING.
You are a fucking ignorant fool Frank. Do yourself a favor: get an education and use it.
hey tooth, when does the good science start. The bad political pseudo science has lost. Better get to work, the world waits.As Frank demonstrates, most deniers believe Dread Lord Ottmar is forcing socialism upon the entire world. And they don't understand why that looks so nuckin' futz.
So, what's the long term plan, deniers? I mean, besides endlessly repeating all the tactics that made you world laughingstocks. (Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.)
I'll tell you our long term plan. Do good science, and ridicule the cult clowns.
Hide the decline was a tool to hide the decline in temperatures that were already evident at the time. After East Angelia was outed as a fraud, even Phil Jones admitted there's been no recent warming
Hide the decline was a tool to hide the decline in temperatures that were already evident at the time. After East Angelia was outed as a fraud, even Phil Jones admitted there's been no recent warming
There was no such decline in temperatures.
You're just a fucking idiot Frank. That's all there is to it.
are you claiming that they are carrying on like drunken frat boys on the government dime when they are supposed to be doing science?
It's becoming more and more obvious that you're not only as stupid as a brick, but that you have no real life.
Hide the decline is your good science.
Your side admitted that they're EnviroMarxist, it's really that simple
You think "hide the decline" is an admission of "enviromarxism"? Please elaborate for us Frank
are you claiming that they are carrying on like drunken frat boys on the government dime when they are supposed to be doing science?
It's becoming more and more obvious that you're not only as stupid as a brick, but that you have no real life.
What is stupid crick is attempting to defend the indefensible.....and lying when you know you are going to be caught out....got that empirical evidence that supports the claim that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will cause warming yet?.....of course not....since it doesn't exist.
What is stupid crick is attempting to defend the indefensible.....and lying when you know you are going to be caught out....got that empirical evidence that supports the claim that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will cause warming yet?.....of course not....since it doesn't exist.
Being an engineer, I understand most physics. That would include the greenhouse effect, for which enormous amounts of empirical evidence exists. Being simply a normal human being, I also understand that SSDD is ignorant, antisocial and overwhelmed with issues of ego.
Being an engineer, I understand most physics. That would include the greenhouse effect, for which enormous amounts of empirical evidence exists. Being simply a normal human being, I also understand that SSDD is ignorant, antisocial and overwhelmed with issues of ego.