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.
you always gotta be the one who sits as judge n jury on this shit.40 years ago they were saying we were headed for another ice age.All previous government reports were stacked with AGW cult members. Why are you complaining about that now?It's about time. Watch the AGW cult go crazy attacking this:
The Trump administration is planning to create an ad hoc group of federal scientists to reassess and counter the government's conclusions on climate change, The Washington Post reported Sunday.
The National Security Council (NSC) initiative would feature scientists who challenge the seriousness of climate change and the degree to which humans are the cause of climate problems, three unidentified administration officials told the Post.
The Post reported that the plan was discussed by administration officials on Friday in the White House Situation Room.
It is considered a modified version of NSC senior director and climate denier William Happer's plan to create a panel on climate change and national security, according to the newspaper.
The NSC declined to comment to the Post.
At the Friday meeting, deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman said President Trump was upset that the federal government last year released the National Climate Assessment, the Post reported.
The National Climate Assessment warned that climate change could have devastating effects on the economy, health and environment and that current efforts to counter climate change were insufficient.
Trump has been outspoken in doubting the effects of climate change, sometimes calling it a hoax. Following the release of last year's climate assessment, Trump said that he didn't "believe" the report's findings.
āYeah, I donāt believe it,ā Trump said at the time
āIāve seen it, Iāve read some of it, and itās fine,ā he added.
From your link: "It is considered a modified version of NSC senior director and climate denier William Happer's plan to create a panel on climate change and national security, according to the newspaper.
And of course Trump is a denier, so there is absolutely no question, what the result of this obvious stacked report will say.
BriPat, you and your shut-in buddy Gomer from the sticks Oddball, would suck this up, because that's just the way you folks are. Goose-steppers.
Considering, that a very large majority do believe in climate change, based on various tests and studies that are evidence based. It's hard to find many deniers who are scientists.
Even those corporations who are paying deniers, have themselves acknowledged Global Warming.
Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago
Shell Knew Fossil Fuels Created Climate Change Risks Back in 1980s, Internal Documents Show
Holding Major Fossil Fuel Companies Accountable for Nearly 40 Years of Climate Deception and Harm
No they were not. That is just a partisan talking point. You should know better.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
you always gotta be the one who sits as judge n jury on this shit.40 years ago they were saying we were headed for another ice age.All previous government reports were stacked with AGW cult members. Why are you complaining about that now?From your link: "It is considered a modified version of NSC senior director and climate denier William Happer's plan to create a panel on climate change and national security, according to the newspaper.
And of course Trump is a denier, so there is absolutely no question, what the result of this obvious stacked report will say.
BriPat, you and your shut-in buddy Gomer from the sticks Oddball, would suck this up, because that's just the way you folks are. Goose-steppers.
Considering, that a very large majority do believe in climate change, based on various tests and studies that are evidence based. It's hard to find many deniers who are scientists.
Even those corporations who are paying deniers, have themselves acknowledged Global Warming.
Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago
Shell Knew Fossil Fuels Created Climate Change Risks Back in 1980s, Internal Documents Show
Holding Major Fossil Fuel Companies Accountable for Nearly 40 Years of Climate Deception and Harm
No they were not. That is just a partisan talking point. You should know better.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
anyway -
In 1975, Newsweek Predicted A New Ice Age. Weāre Still Living with the Consequences.
ā83% Consensusā?! 285 Papers From 1960s-ā80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific āConsensusā
Donāt Miss it! Climate Depotās Factsheet on 1970s Coming āIce Ageā Claims
Inside the Beltway
and to be fair there are a lot that say "bullshit" also.
much like today.
One really has to be a special kind of stupid to think humans are causing glowarm. Its the height of arrogance.
great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.you always gotta be the one who sits as judge n jury on this shit.40 years ago they were saying we were headed for another ice age.All previous government reports were stacked with AGW cult members. Why are you complaining about that now?
Considering, that a very large majority do believe in climate change, based on various tests and studies that are evidence based. It's hard to find many deniers who are scientists.
Even those corporations who are paying deniers, have themselves acknowledged Global Warming.
Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago
Shell Knew Fossil Fuels Created Climate Change Risks Back in 1980s, Internal Documents Show
Holding Major Fossil Fuel Companies Accountable for Nearly 40 Years of Climate Deception and Harm
No they were not. That is just a partisan talking point. You should know better.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
anyway -
In 1975, Newsweek Predicted A New Ice Age. Weāre Still Living with the Consequences.
ā83% Consensusā?! 285 Papers From 1960s-ā80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific āConsensusā
Donāt Miss it! Climate Depotās Factsheet on 1970s Coming āIce Ageā Claims
Inside the Beltway
and to be fair there are a lot that say "bullshit" also.
much like today.
From your first link...All climate change deniers needed was one article to cast doubt on the science of global warming.
One really has to be a special kind of stupid to think humans are causing glowarm. Its the height of arrogance.
No, it is the height of arrogance to think we can do what the fuck ever we want to the planet without any consequences.
great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.you always gotta be the one who sits as judge n jury on this shit.40 years ago they were saying we were headed for another ice age.Considering, that a very large majority do believe in climate change, based on various tests and studies that are evidence based. It's hard to find many deniers who are scientists.
Even those corporations who are paying deniers, have themselves acknowledged Global Warming.
Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago
Shell Knew Fossil Fuels Created Climate Change Risks Back in 1980s, Internal Documents Show
Holding Major Fossil Fuel Companies Accountable for Nearly 40 Years of Climate Deception and Harm
No they were not. That is just a partisan talking point. You should know better.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
anyway -
In 1975, Newsweek Predicted A New Ice Age. Weāre Still Living with the Consequences.
ā83% Consensusā?! 285 Papers From 1960s-ā80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific āConsensusā
Donāt Miss it! Climate Depotās Factsheet on 1970s Coming āIce Ageā Claims
Inside the Beltway
and to be fair there are a lot that say "bullshit" also.
much like today.
From your first link...All climate change deniers needed was one article to cast doubt on the science of global warming.
yes, the climate is changing. has been since day 1 of existence. the need to blame mankind is our problem, not the planets.
i don't know what the fuck crawls up your ass at times, but let me know when you're done.great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.you always gotta be the one who sits as judge n jury on this shit.40 years ago they were saying we were headed for another ice age.
No they were not. That is just a partisan talking point. You should know better.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
anyway -
In 1975, Newsweek Predicted A New Ice Age. Weāre Still Living with the Consequences.
ā83% Consensusā?! 285 Papers From 1960s-ā80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific āConsensusā
Donāt Miss it! Climate Depotās Factsheet on 1970s Coming āIce Ageā Claims
Inside the Beltway
and to be fair there are a lot that say "bullshit" also.
much like today.
From your first link...All climate change deniers needed was one article to cast doubt on the science of global warming.
yes, the climate is changing. has been since day 1 of existence. the need to blame mankind is our problem, not the planets.
And this highlights the problem of getting your science from the media. Do you turn to the media for medical advise?
i don't know what the fuck crawls up your ass at times, but let me know when you're done.great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.you always gotta be the one who sits as judge n jury on this shit.No they were not. That is just a partisan talking point. You should know better.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
anyway -
In 1975, Newsweek Predicted A New Ice Age. Weāre Still Living with the Consequences.
ā83% Consensusā?! 285 Papers From 1960s-ā80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific āConsensusā
Donāt Miss it! Climate Depotās Factsheet on 1970s Coming āIce Ageā Claims
Inside the Beltway
and to be fair there are a lot that say "bullshit" also.
much like today.
From your first link...All climate change deniers needed was one article to cast doubt on the science of global warming.
yes, the climate is changing. has been since day 1 of existence. the need to blame mankind is our problem, not the planets.
And this highlights the problem of getting your science from the media. Do you turn to the media for medical advise?
now if that's what i did, great. except all i said was the media has been all over the map on global warming / climate change / freezing. i never said i based my views on that YOU DID.i don't know what the fuck crawls up your ass at times, but let me know when you're done.great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.you always gotta be the one who sits as judge n jury on this shit.
anyway -
In 1975, Newsweek Predicted A New Ice Age. Weāre Still Living with the Consequences.
ā83% Consensusā?! 285 Papers From 1960s-ā80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific āConsensusā
Donāt Miss it! Climate Depotās Factsheet on 1970s Coming āIce Ageā Claims
Inside the Beltway
and to be fair there are a lot that say "bullshit" also.
much like today.
From your first link...All climate change deniers needed was one article to cast doubt on the science of global warming.
yes, the climate is changing. has been since day 1 of existence. the need to blame mankind is our problem, not the planets.
And this highlights the problem of getting your science from the media. Do you turn to the media for medical advise?
What gets up my ass is people that base their science on what they hear on TV news or read in news magazines or from politicians.
Do you really think those are reliable sources of information?
It makes no more sense to base your view of global warming on those sources than to base your medical decisions based on those sources.
now if that's what i did, great. except all i said was the media has been all over the map on global warming / climate change / freezing. i never said i based my views on that YOU DID.i don't know what the fuck crawls up your ass at times, but let me know when you're done.great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.From your first link...All climate change deniers needed was one article to cast doubt on the science of global warming.
yes, the climate is changing. has been since day 1 of existence. the need to blame mankind is our problem, not the planets.
And this highlights the problem of getting your science from the media. Do you turn to the media for medical advise?
What gets up my ass is people that base their science on what they hear on TV news or read in news magazines or from politicians.
Do you really think those are reliable sources of information?
It makes no more sense to base your view of global warming on those sources than to base your medical decisions based on those sources.
and then you tear into me for what YOU said i said, totally bypassing what i have said several times now.
have fun, i'm out.
now if that's what i did, great. except all i said was the media has been all over the map on global warming / climate change / freezing. i never said i based my views on that YOU DID.i don't know what the fuck crawls up your ass at times, but let me know when you're done.great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.
yes, the climate is changing. has been since day 1 of existence. the need to blame mankind is our problem, not the planets.
And this highlights the problem of getting your science from the media. Do you turn to the media for medical advise?
What gets up my ass is people that base their science on what they hear on TV news or read in news magazines or from politicians.
Do you really think those are reliable sources of information?
It makes no more sense to base your view of global warming on those sources than to base your medical decisions based on those sources.
and then you tear into me for what YOU said i said, totally bypassing what i have said several times now.
have fun, i'm out.
If people were not getting their science form these sources, it would not matter what they published. So, while you may not be, far too many people are.
Paul Ryan is as conservative as they comeAsk Paul Ryan and others that are RINOS.Then what are you whining about? Did you whine when the previous report came out? Of course you didn't.You mean exactly like what happened with the previous report?But that is not what is happening. The group is not being put together of open-minded people to look objectively at the data, they are people with the answer already decided that are going to write a report to support it.
Most likely. Thanks again for showing that Trump is no different at all from Obama.
You sheep kept telling me Trump was different, that he was a change for the better.
Why do you lie so much?
General Officers are approved by CongressYou don't believe the President of the United States has control over which generals are promoted in the military?
Talk about fucking stupid.
Nope, I do not. And since only one of us actually served, only one of us would have any idea how promotions work in the military.
In the Marines, the first 2 promotions are automatic if you do not get into trouble....how does the POTUS control that?
The next two promotions are based upon a cutting score that is determined by your PFT score, TIS, TIG, rifle range score....how does the POTUS control that?
The rest of the promotions are based upon a randomly chosen board of your peers that meet once a year and looks over the paperwork for all qualified Marines of that grade and chose the best ones as they can determine...how does the POTUS control that?
Explain how the POTUS controls that process for each individual Marine.
General Officers are approved by CongressYou don't believe the President of the United States has control over which generals are promoted in the military?
Talk about fucking stupid.
Nope, I do not. And since only one of us actually served, only one of us would have any idea how promotions work in the military.
In the Marines, the first 2 promotions are automatic if you do not get into trouble....how does the POTUS control that?
The next two promotions are based upon a cutting score that is determined by your PFT score, TIS, TIG, rifle range score....how does the POTUS control that?
The rest of the promotions are based upon a randomly chosen board of your peers that meet once a year and looks over the paperwork for all qualified Marines of that grade and chose the best ones as they can determine...how does the POTUS control that?
Explain how the POTUS controls that process for each individual Marine.
Promotions for generals are chosen by the President and then approved by Congress, moron.You don't believe the President of the United States has control over which generals are promoted in the military?
Talk about fucking stupid.
Nope, I do not. And since only one of us actually served, only one of us would have any idea how promotions work in the military.
In the Marines, the first 2 promotions are automatic if you do not get into trouble....how does the POTUS control that?
The next two promotions are based upon a cutting score that is determined by your PFT score, TIS, TIG, rifle range score....how does the POTUS control that?
The rest of the promotions are based upon a randomly chosen board of your peers that meet once a year and looks over the paperwork for all qualified Marines of that grade and chose the best ones as they can determine...how does the POTUS control that?
Explain how the POTUS controls that process for each individual Marine.
Promotions for generals are chosen by the President and then approved by Congress, moron.You don't believe the President of the United States has control over which generals are promoted in the military?
Talk about fucking stupid.
Nope, I do not. And since only one of us actually served, only one of us would have any idea how promotions work in the military.
In the Marines, the first 2 promotions are automatic if you do not get into trouble....how does the POTUS control that?
The next two promotions are based upon a cutting score that is determined by your PFT score, TIS, TIG, rifle range score....how does the POTUS control that?
The rest of the promotions are based upon a randomly chosen board of your peers that meet once a year and looks over the paperwork for all qualified Marines of that grade and chose the best ones as they can determine...how does the POTUS control that?
Explain how the POTUS controls that process for each individual Marine.
The kind of people most likely to get their "science" from the media are the ones who believe the AGW hocus-pocus.now if that's what i did, great. except all i said was the media has been all over the map on global warming / climate change / freezing. i never said i based my views on that YOU DID.i don't know what the fuck crawls up your ass at times, but let me know when you're done.great. except my point is the media keeps changing their mind and i've seen it all different ways in my lifetime. i never said what i saw in the media, for or against, was how *I* personally felt.
yes, the climate is changing. has been since day 1 of existence. the need to blame mankind is our problem, not the planets.
And this highlights the problem of getting your science from the media. Do you turn to the media for medical advise?
What gets up my ass is people that base their science on what they hear on TV news or read in news magazines or from politicians.
Do you really think those are reliable sources of information?
It makes no more sense to base your view of global warming on those sources than to base your medical decisions based on those sources.
and then you tear into me for what YOU said i said, totally bypassing what i have said several times now.
have fun, i'm out.
If people were not getting their science form these sources, it would not matter what they published. So, while you may not be, far too many people are.
I was not tearing into you....quit being such a snowflake.
