How Long Will Waterhead Believe in Global Warming?

[ib1yysguy]

and how many of those papers used the data produced by Mann, Jones or Brifa?

How many of them were 'reviewed' by other hacks in on the scam?

There was no scam.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Its funny how these bogus emails "convieniently" surfaced right before a big UN meeting on the cutting down emissions. I think the oil companies were financing the company accused of trying to manipulate climate data and then convieniently outed them right before the big UN meeting on Global Warming. Very common tactics of the elites. I for one am not impressed and I know, when things like this happen? It was all per-planned.

If any of you read the papers? You would still know that the majority of scientists support the fact that we are contributing to global warming.

 

[Topspin]

Unil Miss gets color tv and he can read the charts.

 

[Topspin]

Ya know, there are some people on this forum that I can respect/believe, therefore, I'll go with the idea that global warming (man made) is in hurting status, if not done for. Now, could somebody hack some oil company computers and verify that there is like 500 years worth of oil left, and bring the price of oil down to like $20 a barrell so I can buy and afford to drive my Hummer.

Somebody shoot this man, yestarday. Anything under $100 your stealing from us and raping the earth. A fair price for oil is $150 plus 2 years of inflation.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Its funny how these bogus emails "convieniently" surfaced right before a big UN meeting on the cutting down emissions. I think the oil companies were financing the company accused of trying to manipulate climate data and then convieniently outed them right before the big UN meeting on Global Warming. Very common tactics of the elites. I for one am not impressed and I know, when things like this happen? It was all per-planned.

If any of you read the papers? You would still know that the majority of scientists support the fact that we are contributing to global warming.

No they don't.

 

[Minister of Truth]

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

It's not simply the majority of climatologists support AGW. It's damn near unanimous conclusion in the field. Denying AGW is like denying evolution, or denying the big bang. It's only done by idiot amateurs who have no real experience in the field of climatology. I'm going to paraphrase Dawkins here: If AGW is disproved, it will be done by a scientist, not an idiot.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

It's not simply the majority of climatologists support AGW. It's damn near unanimous conclusion in the field. Denying AGW is like denying evolution, or denying the big bang. It's only done by idiot amateurs who have no real experience in the field of climatology. I'm going to paraphrase Dawkins here: If AGW is disproved, it will be done by a scientist, not an idiot.

No, you are wrong. Climatologists may have supported AGW when they believed the misleading data being peddled by people with an agenda, but that condition has changed. It's never been "near unanimous" at all, there are a wide range of contradicting theories regarding the possible phenomenon. Science has never PROVEN anything, and now we find the evidence is being suppressed if it doesn't fit the agenda, so we can discount the entire premise of your argument, it simply FAILS the test of science.

Plant life lives on carbon dioxide... If we could talk to the plants, they would tell us they want MORE carbon dioxide, not less. Scientists who study plants and plant life, do not share the climatologists views on carbon dioxide, their studies show a significant increase in growth rates of plant life with rising carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Those of you pushing this FRAUD SCIENCE of AGW, are actually being detrimental to plant life on Earth! Your agenda is not "Green" at all... it's RED!

 

[ib1yysguy]

Keep in mind that Dixie is the one who always runs around saying the world is cooling.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/decade_s_end_climate

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It's not simply the majority of climatologists support AGW. It's damn near unanimous conclusion in the field. Denying AGW is like denying evolution, or denying the big bang. It's only done by idiot amateurs who have no real experience in the field of climatology. I'm going to paraphrase Dawkins here: If AGW is disproved, it will be done by a scientist, not an idiot.

You may want to check your stats again...

Thousands of REAL scientists do not support AGW. One major reason is they realize that REAL science does not see the scientists trying to HIDE or DESTROY their data.

Here is a list of some of those scientists and the reasons for their questioning the almighty 'consensus'

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming[/ame]



Here is a list of 31,000 American scientists against AGW...

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Keep in mind that Dixie is the one who always runs around saying the world is cooling.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/decade_s_end_climate

Ahhh yes, another story with the proclamations of the fear mongers taken as gospel... yet look at the source data... it belongs to Hansen (NASA)...

It has been shown that he has manipulated his data in the past to show a false warming trend. Yet for some reason, people keep quoting his data and pretending it is trustworthy.... I wonder why???

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1854

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

There is still more evidence that it exsists then there is evidence that it doesnt.

When the balence of the evidence points in one direction then you can understand why the majority of scientists believe it exsists.

When there are monied interests who are hell bent on suppressing the evidence you will find certain scientists who will try anything (say stealing personal emails and writing bags of shit and submitting them as scientific papers) to get some money from them.

It kinda makes real scientists mad and they would like to see them lose their finacial backing.

Follow the money

The bolded portion is truly comical given the circumstances.

That said, I acknowledge the oil industry has its hacks doing the same thing.

 

[Cypress]

Just curious what everybody thinks...

I think I can reasonably assume that you're wrong in about 99.9% of everything you assert, or think. Didn't you vote for Dumbya twice, cheerlead us into the unneccessary Iraq war, claimed Iraq was allied with Al Qaeda, and have a habit of downplaying or dismissing fundamental tenets of science like evolution? Aren't you the dude that can go from claiming you're a devout christian, to claiming you're a non-religious aetheist, in the span of a few short weeks?

Regardless of the manufactured "controversies" your right wing blogs order you to accept and to parrot, the science is about as well established on this issue as science can get. Aren''t these same right wing blogs that are now ordering you to parrot some nonsense about emails, the same one's who frightened you with tales of WMD and Saddam being allied with Al Qaeda?

from the World Meteorological Organization:

This Decade Is Warmest on Record, 2009 Ranks Fifth

This decade is set to be the warmest on record though 2009 won't be the hottest year, meteorologists said today, lending fuel to both skeptics and supporters of a global warming agreement being negotiated in Copenhagen.

Data from the U.K. Met Office and the United Nations' World Meteorological Organization show this year will be the fifth- warmest. The global average temperature was 0.44 degrees Celsius above the 1961 through 1990 average temperature of 14 degrees (57 degrees Fahrenheit), the WMO said in the Danish capital.

"This tells us that global warming is still rising," Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, said in a telephone interview in Copenhagen, where two weeks of United Nations talks began yesterday to draft a climate deal. "Greenhouse gases continue to increase, and it's clearly important we reach an agreement in Copenhagen to reduce them." ...

The main reason 1998 was so warm was because of a strong El Nino, a periodic warming of equatorial waters in the eastern Pacific that affects the world climate, Pope said.

Of the 10 hottest years on record, nine occurred in the 2000s, according to the Met Office, which said it expected temperatures to keep rising as a result of greenhouse-gas emissions.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=axqsAEyw7U.A

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I think I can reasonably assume that you're wrong in about 99.9% of everything you assert, or think. Didn't you vote for Dumbya twice, cheerlead us into the unneccessary Iraq war, claimed Iraq was allied with Al Qaeda, and have a habit of downplaying or dismissing fundamental tenets of science like evolution? Aren't you the dude that can go from claiming you're a devout christian, to claiming you're a non-religious aetheist, in the span of a few short weeks?

Regardless of the manufactured "controversies" your right wing blogs order you to accept and to parrot, the science is about as well established on this issue as science can get. Aren''t these same right wing blogs that are now ordering you to parrot some nonsense about emails, the same one's who frightened you with tales of WMD and Saddam being allied with Al Qaeda?

from the World Meteorological Organization:



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=axqsAEyw7U.A

More fear mongering from the Met.

regardless of the left wing fear mongering reports from the Met and Hansen and Mann and Briffa and Jones that you kool aid drinkers are compelled to regurgitate.... the science is hardly established. To the contrary... the manipulated data, the destruction of original data, the constant fighting of FOIA requests etc.... lends credence to the fact that the debate is far from over.

Only a complete hack would be yelling 'CONSENSUS' right now.