Why do so many people deny climate change

[itfitzme]

And, yes, it's easily possible that all the so-called "climate scientists" working for the IPCC are wrong and I'm right.

I have to say that I laugh at the absurdity of this statement every time I read it.

 

[Abraham3]

Wiki? Once again, I am laughing in your face. Only the worst sort of tragically stupid idiot relies on wiki, and only the basest of fools uses it regularly. Is there anything that you warmers don't lie about?

So, you don't seem to have bought in to the idea of the lot of us ceasing to insult each other. I've been having substantial conversations with a number of your fellow AGW-deniers without any of us falling to the level you've just exampled.

Why don't you try it. If you don't like it, phrases like "tragically stupid idiot" and "basest of fools" will be waiting hot in the wings to allow you to "laugh in our faces" anytime you want. Till then, you could demonstrate your ability to prove the substance of your argument is superior without making use of irrelevant personal criticism.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Trees? Under the ice in Alaska?? 1000 years ago??

That can only mean one thing...the SUV is far older than anyone realizes

 

[Abraham3]

Trees? Under the ice in Alaska?? 1000 years ago??

That can only mean one thing...the SUV is far older than anyone realizes

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I just wanted to make certain you were aware that Alaska has trees at the present time. Lots of them. Really. Lots and lots.

 

[PMZ]

Since more people die from cold, a warming world would result in fewer climate related deaths.

In the common patois:

That's been 'proven' wrong. Try again

Does Hot weather or cold weather cause more deaths

Wiki? Once again, I am laughing in your face. Only the worst sort of tragically stupid idiot relies on wiki, and only the basest of fools uses it regularly. Is there anything that you warmers don't lie about?

http://geosciences.msstate.edu/faculty/dixon/reprints/2005bams.pdf

Of the datasets identified in this study, the one that appears to be least influenced by the above limitations is gross mortality. However, the gross mortality data must be detrended in order to remove a persistent winter-dominant death maximum.

The Health Benefits of a Warmer Climate

Cold Weather vs. Warm Weather: Which Kills More People?

Heat or Cold: Which Is More Deadly?

Why don't publish a catalog of errors that you've found in Wikipedia. Errors in their publications. Not things that they publish that you disagree with because they are much more likely to be correct than you are.

 

[bripat9643]

Trees? Under the ice in Alaska?? 1000 years ago??

That can only mean one thing...the SUV is far older than anyone realizes

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I just wanted to make certain you were aware that Alaska has trees at the present time. Lots of them. Really. Lots and lots.

If trees have been buried by a glacier for 1000 years, that means 1000 years ago the glacier was smaller than it is now.

If you can't figure out what that means, I'll be happy to explain it to you.

 

[bripat9643]

Wiki? Once again, I am laughing in your face. Only the worst sort of tragically stupid idiot relies on wiki, and only the basest of fools uses it regularly. Is there anything that you warmers don't lie about?

So, you don't seem to have bought in to the idea of the lot of us ceasing to insult each other. I've been having substantial conversations with a number of your fellow AGW-deniers without any of us falling to the level you've just exampled.

Why don't you try it. If you don't like it, phrases like "tragically stupid idiot" and "basest of fools" will be waiting hot in the wings to allow you to "laugh in our faces" anytime you want. Till then, you could demonstrate your ability to prove the substance of your argument is superior without making use of irrelevant personal criticism.

Every time you use the term "denier" you're insulting us, so your complaints come off as crocodile tears.

 

[bripat9643]

And, yes, it's easily possible that all the so-called "climate scientists" working for the IPCC are wrong and I'm right.

I have to say that I laugh at the absurdity of this statement every time I read it.

Buffoons are always laughing. The problem is no one else is laughing.

 

[orogenicman]

Trees? Under the ice in Alaska?? 1000 years ago??

That can only mean one thing...the SUV is far older than anyone realizes

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I just wanted to make certain you were aware that Alaska has trees at the present time. Lots of them. Really. Lots and lots.

If trees have been buried by a glacier for 1000 years, that means 1000 years ago the glacier was smaller than it is now.

If you can't figure out what that means, I'll be happy to explain it to you.

If glaciers were static objects that never experienced gains or losses of mass, often simultaneously, you might have a point. They are not, so you are wrong in your assumption.

 

[orogenicman]

Wiki? Once again, I am laughing in your face. Only the worst sort of tragically stupid idiot relies on wiki, and only the basest of fools uses it regularly. Is there anything that you warmers don't lie about?

So, you don't seem to have bought in to the idea of the lot of us ceasing to insult each other. I've been having substantial conversations with a number of your fellow AGW-deniers without any of us falling to the level you've just exampled.

Why don't you try it. If you don't like it, phrases like "tragically stupid idiot" and "basest of fools" will be waiting hot in the wings to allow you to "laugh in our faces" anytime you want. Till then, you could demonstrate your ability to prove the substance of your argument is superior without making use of irrelevant personal criticism.

Every time you use the term "denier" you're insulting us, so your complaints come off as crocodile tears.

Complaining when someone tells the truth, that isn't expressing crocodile tears?

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I just wanted to make certain you were aware that Alaska has trees at the present time. Lots of them. Really. Lots and lots.

If trees have been buried by a glacier for 1000 years, that means 1000 years ago the glacier was smaller than it is now.

If you can't figure out what that means, I'll be happy to explain it to you.

If glaciers were static objects that never experienced gains or losses of mass, often simultaneously, you might have a point. They are not, so you are wrong in your assumption.

Uh, no I'm not. All the AGW cult members are moaning that the glaciers are shrinking, but the existence of trees buried under them indicates 1000 years ago they were even smaller than they are now.

 

[bripat9643]

So, you don't seem to have bought in to the idea of the lot of us ceasing to insult each other. I've been having substantial conversations with a number of your fellow AGW-deniers without any of us falling to the level you've just exampled.

Why don't you try it. If you don't like it, phrases like "tragically stupid idiot" and "basest of fools" will be waiting hot in the wings to allow you to "laugh in our faces" anytime you want. Till then, you could demonstrate your ability to prove the substance of your argument is superior without making use of irrelevant personal criticism.

Every time you use the term "denier" you're insulting us, so your complaints come off as crocodile tears.

Complaining when someone tells the truth, that isn't expressing crocodile tears?

OK then. Don't complain when I call you a jackass.

After all, it's the simple truth.

 

[Katzndogz]

If trees have been buried by a glacier for 1000 years, that means 1000 years ago the glacier was smaller than it is now.

If you can't figure out what that means, I'll be happy to explain it to you.

If glaciers were static objects that never experienced gains or losses of mass, often simultaneously, you might have a point. They are not, so you are wrong in your assumption.

Uh, no I'm not. All the AGW cult members are moaning that the glaciers are shrinking, but the existence of trees buried under them indicates 1000 years ago they were even smaller than they are now.

The glaciers aren't shrinking they've grown 60% more than there previous largest size. It is very difficult to hold the faith in global warming when they are freezing. The last three years in a row global warming conferences have had to be cancelled because of cold or a blizzard.

Reality makes it very hard to continue faith in global warming.

 

[PMZ]

Wiki? Once again, I am laughing in your face. Only the worst sort of tragically stupid idiot relies on wiki, and only the basest of fools uses it regularly. Is there anything that you warmers don't lie about?

So, you don't seem to have bought in to the idea of the lot of us ceasing to insult each other. I've been having substantial conversations with a number of your fellow AGW-deniers without any of us falling to the level you've just exampled.

Why don't you try it. If you don't like it, phrases like "tragically stupid idiot" and "basest of fools" will be waiting hot in the wings to allow you to "laugh in our faces" anytime you want. Till then, you could demonstrate your ability to prove the substance of your argument is superior without making use of irrelevant personal criticism.

Every time you use the term "denier" you're insulting us, so your complaints come off as crocodile tears.

What would you call people who deny science?

 

[bripat9643]

So, you don't seem to have bought in to the idea of the lot of us ceasing to insult each other. I've been having substantial conversations with a number of your fellow AGW-deniers without any of us falling to the level you've just exampled.

Why don't you try it. If you don't like it, phrases like "tragically stupid idiot" and "basest of fools" will be waiting hot in the wings to allow you to "laugh in our faces" anytime you want. Till then, you could demonstrate your ability to prove the substance of your argument is superior without making use of irrelevant personal criticism.

Every time you use the term "denier" you're insulting us, so your complaints come off as crocodile tears.

What would you call people who deny science?

I call them members of the AGW cult.

 

[orogenicman]

If trees have been buried by a glacier for 1000 years, that means 1000 years ago the glacier was smaller than it is now.

If you can't figure out what that means, I'll be happy to explain it to you.

If glaciers were static objects that never experienced gains or losses of mass, often simultaneously, you might have a point. They are not, so you are wrong in your assumption.

Uh, no I'm not. All the AGW cult members are moaning that the glaciers are shrinking, but the existence of trees buried under them indicates 1000 years ago they were even smaller than they are now.

No sir, what it means is that you are clueless as to how glaciers work.

 

[PMZ]

Every time you use the term "denier" you're insulting us, so your complaints come off as crocodile tears.

What would you call people who deny science?

I call them members of the AGW cult.

The IPCC is climate science. There is no science that says otherwise. Period.

Unfortunate for you. Do you have enough integrity to admit that?

 

[SSDD]

Rajendra K. Pachauri
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Born 20 August 1940 (age 73)

Nainital, United Provinces, British Raj (now Uttarakhand, India)

Nationality Indian
Alma mater North Carolina State University and La Martiniere Lucknow
Occupation Chief, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Director General, TERI, Head Yale Climate and Energy Institute

Religion Hindu
Spouse(s) Saroj Pachauri
Children Daughter Rashmi Pachauri-Rajan.[1]

Rajendra Kumar Pachauri (born 20 August 1940) has been serving as the chairperson of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 2002, which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007[2][3] during his tenure. He has also been the director general of TERI, a research and policy organization in India, and chancellor of TERI University; besides being the chairman of the governing council of the National Agro Foundation (NAF), as well as the chairman of the board of Columbia University's International Research Institute for Climate and Society. Pachauri has been outspoken about climate change. He has been appointed as Senior Adviser to Yale Climate and Energy Institute (YCEI) from July 2012 prior to which he was the Founding Director of YCEI (July 2009 – June 2012).

Pachauri was born in Nainital, India. He was educated at La Martiniere College in Lucknow[4] and at the Indian Railways Institute of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering in Jamalpur, Bihar. He belongs to the Special Class Railway Apprentices, 1958 Batch, an elite scheme which heralded the beginning of mechanical engineering education in India.[5] He began his career with the Indian Railways at the Diesel Locomotive Works in Varanasi. He joined the North Carolina State University in Raleigh, USA, where he obtained an MS in Industrial Engineering in 1972, and a Ph.D. with co-majors in Industrial Engineering and Economics in 1974.[6] His doctoral thesis was titled, A dynamic model for forecasting of electrical energy demand in a specific region located in North and South Carolina.[7] He lives in Golf Links, New Delhi.[8] He is a strict vegetarian, partly due to his beliefs as a Hindu, and partly because of the impact of meat-production on the environment.[9]

And if you've never written any soft porn in your day, I have to ask you what you did with your testicles.

Actually, I haven't the faintest idea what you refer to with your "soft-porn" comment. The man's a hindu. They're not particularly known for excess lasciviousness.

And I don't know where you got YOUR information, but characterizing the man as a railroad engineer seems slightly prejudiced. Let's put all that text in nice clear tabular form:

Initial engineering education from the Indian Railway Institute of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering
MS in Industrial Engineering
PhD in Industrial Engineering
PhD in Economics

Director General The Energy and Research Institute (TERI)
Chancellor, TERI University
Chairman, Governing Council, National Agro Foundation
Chairman of the Board, Columbia University's International Research Institute for Climate and Society
Founding Director and Senior Adviser to Yale Climate and Energy Institute
and, since 2002, Chairperson of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

So you acknowledge that he is a railroad engineer. Again, what sort of scientific organization dealing with climate puts a railroad engineer in charge?

As to the soft porn....unsurprising that you would be uninformed. Typical. Look up "Return to Amora" Seems that he doesn't keep to the tenets of his religion either. Corrupt all the way through it seems.

 

[SSDD]

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I just wanted to make certain you were aware that Alaska has trees at the present time. Lots of them. Really. Lots and lots.

If trees have been buried by a glacier for 1000 years, that means 1000 years ago the glacier was smaller than it is now.

If you can't figure out what that means, I'll be happy to explain it to you.

If glaciers were static objects that never experienced gains or losses of mass, often simultaneously, you might have a point. They are not, so you are wrong in your assumption.

The climate isn't static either but you warmers seem to think it is. Show me one study that finds, and proves a definitive human finger print in the present global climate.

 

[Abraham3]

Why should anyone be surprised that a glacier was growing, a thousand years ago?

And why don't you tell us what - for you - would qualify as a "definitive human fingerprint" so we don't waste time playing guessing games?

But, while I'm typing, I'd proffer the isotopic analysis that shows that every bit of the excess CO2 (above 280 ppm) came from the combustion of fossil fuels. But do feel free to explain why that's not a "definitive human fingerprint".