A Quick Update on "Climate Gate" Comedy: Denialist Follies, Part Trois

[Taichiliberal]

Please allow me to 'illuminate' you... no, actually, let me light that ass up one good time... ALL of your supporting arguments for man-made global warming, are predicated on false data that was manipulated and made to appear as it did, to support the theory. That has been exposed, and now you are all running around in a panic, waving these studies done on false pretense around, claiming they are still legitimate proof of something, when that is asinine on it's face. You might get some really stupid people to buy your phony baloney theory now, and I guess that is what you're after, but I hate to tell you, it won't be enough to make a difference. The overwhelming majority realizes the bloom is off the rose now, and your little theory has been discredited for the fraudulent load of crap it always was.

And while Cypress will give links to actual scientists who are accredited and who can produce their findings, all you can do is whistle Dixie with your opinion, supposition and conjecture. The more FACTS and LOGIC Cypress produces, the louder the insults and opinion laden claptrap from you and your like minded cohorts become.

The very sources you depended on to support your climate change denial had to eat crow...and YOU don't like it! And I ain't whistl'in Dixie on that, as the chronology of the Posts shows.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I would suggest not reading outdated Wikipedia links and jumping to any wingnut conclusions.

NOTE TO EVERYONE... first 2001 was outdated.... NOW 2006 is outdated. Pretty soon the latest IPCC report issued in 2007 will also be 'outdated' according to the resident moron's standards.

Hardly anyone, even people with science degrees, have ever heard of “The Univesity of Delaware Climatic Research Unit”. Here’s a tip. Any professor can set up a website and call it a “Research Institute”. Remember when you tried to give me link to the “Oregon Research Institute”, and it turned out that the “Oregon Institute” was located on a rural farm in Oregon, and run by a crackpot and his son who are more known for selling homeschooling materials than anything else? Would you please stop wasting my time by tossing crap out in the hopes it will fly under the radar? You don’t know what you’re talking about man, this is total flailing.

ROFLMAO... so NOW our resident expert on what everyone 'has heard of' is trying to dismiss a report by proclaiming that 'no one, even people with Science degrees have heard of.... blah blah blah'

This is the type of crackpot bullshit we all get to deal with from the brain dead fear mongering lemmings. When in doubt, either pretend something is 'right wing' or just say 'nobody ever heard of that guy'. THIS is why Cypress continues to proclaim there is no evidence that disputes AGW. Because he simply ignores anything and makes feeble childish unsubstantiated attacks on anyone who dares challenge what his masters told him to say.

According to the University of Delawares climate center website, the “skeptic” scientist in your Wikipedia article isn’t even at that “center” anymore.

David Russell Legates is the Delaware State Climatologist, an Associate Professor of Geography[1] and Ocean Science and Engineering[2] at the University of Delaware, and former director of the Center for Climatic Research at the same university.

So yes, he has since left the Center... but that does not change his credentials ONE BIT. NO matter how many people you proclaim haven't heard of Delaware.

Their website has three Delaware scientists, none of whom have posted any peer reviewed science, or anything else for that matter that I could find, on their webpage that debunks the current state of climate science, or offers plausible alternative theories. I surveyed the literature you skeptic dude has published, and in recent years he appears to be known for writing opinion articles, and writing non-peer reviewed stuff for rightwing think tanks.

Which has NOTHING to do with the FACT that HE DID issue a research paper on the topic. The same paper you CONTINUE to ignore because you say...'not enough people have heard of him'

Cheers, for bringing up Delaware. Thanks man. It allows me, once again, to demonstrate how pervasive, how robust, and how nearly universal the consensus is on climate change.

No... it allows you to demonstrate what a complete and total hack and moron you are. You have not done a single thing to address his paper. You simply try to belittle where he worked. Which is pathetic.

also, this is the official position of the State of Delaware, in conjunction with local and national climate experts.

LMAO.... exactly... the state GOVERNMENT takes a position. Now tell me... what are the credentials of the governor who took that position Cypress? Her fucking opinion and 'state position' is based on the same fear mongering bullshit that you provide. When someone speaks against it... the state trys to silence that person because... his position and USE OF HIS TITLE.... might 'confuse' people.

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070222/NEWS/702220356/1006/NEWS

How very familiar. Someone provides evidence that disputes what politicians WANT people to believe and well by golly... lets just try to minimize that person rather than address what he/she is providing.

Now, with further regard to your claims that the National Science Academies of the World are not reputable and prestigious sources of information on Climate:

THAT is NOT what I stated Cypress. That is simply your feeble attempt to create a straw man... AGAIN.

I stated that YOUR criteria is that NO scientists or GROUPS should be taken seriously on the topic of climate change if THEY do not work in that specific field.

THAT is YOUR CRITERIA Cypress.

I then went on to point out how many countries NAS.... THAT YOU TOUTED as 'signing off on AGW as scientific fact'.... DO NOT HAVE A SINGLE SCIENTIST working for THEIR COUNTRY'S NAS.

But rather than address it, you would rather pretend that I stated their are no scientists at ANY NAS with credibility.... which is a blatantly false assertion on your part. So you fail yet again.

I did a quick check of the New Zealand National Academy of Science – known there as the New Zealand Royal Society.

AGAIN with a straw man.... I addressed the NAS YOU put forth....

The National Academy of Sciences, Japan - NONE
The National Academy of Sciences, China - NONE
The National Academy of Sciences, Italy - NONE
The National Academy of Sciences, France - NONE
The National Academy of Sciences, Mexico - NONE
The National Academy of Sciences, Brazil - NONE
The National Academy of Sciences, Russia - NONE

And rather than address them... you go off on some tantrum regarding New Zealand ????? Again moron... I am fully aware that there are other countries who have scientists working on global warming. That was not the point of criticism you idiot.

That said... I know you already knew the above and are thus yet again desperately trying to avoid any discussion of your blatant hypocrisy.

Just like the US National Academy of Sciences, the NZ Royal Society commissions their own Panel of Nationally Recognized and Presitgeious New Zealand Climate Experts, and collectively, the Royal Society and their panel of climate experts came to the same conclusion the US Academy did: it is highly likely that humans are mostly responsible for warming of the last half century.

Here is a factoid for you Cypress. Saying 'it is highly likely that man is mostly responsible' is a load of CRAP. THEY COULD HARDLY HAVE BEEN MORE VAGUE.

'highly likely'.... so what there is a 80 or 90 percent chance? Or do THEY mean 70% is high?

'mostly responsible'.... so does that mean man is 51% responsible or 75%?

You see the problem with idiocy like that Cypress? Of course you don't... your masters have trained you well.

I stopped researching after those two.

Again.... translated... 'I didn't look at any of the ones you mentioned and instead again touted others who might actually do research, I hope this will distract most people from the fact that I am once again acting like a complete moron and creating one straw man after another in a vain attempt to appear smart.'

'Your claims that the National Science Academies of the World are not reputable sources[/quote]

Which again is NOT what I claimed. I said some country's NAS, BY YOUR STANDARDS, should not be commenting on AGW.

while you throw out Wikipedia links, rightwing blog links, and links to some outdated and laughable skeptic scientist in Delaware is preposterous. You can’t possibly ask me to waste anymore time on this. You’re obviously emotionally invested in science denial, and this stuff is so easy to debunk, it’s not even fun anymore. You were wrong about Climate Gate, you were wrong that liberal scientists are lying and fudging data. You’ll just have to deal with that somehow.

HERE we go again folks... more of the resident stalkers idiocy. Tell us Cypress... why is it that Legates is 'laughable' to you? Simply because he doesn't agree with your masters position? The only thing laughable is your pathetic attempts to label all critics as 'outdated/right wing/works for a University that I say no one has heard of'.

I have not denied Science you moron. I have stated quite clearly that the SCIENCE... the REAL SCIENCE is not done on this issue. THE VERY SAME THING THAT JONES, THE HEAD OF EAST ANGLIA CLIMATE RESEARCH SAYS.

So who should we believe Cypress? The Head of East Anlgia Climate Research or you... an internet message board poster who has consumed so much kool aid that he refuses to listen to even those he touts as UNIMPEACHABLE?

Tell us Cypress.... WHO should we believe? YOU or Jones?

Hopefully that's crystal clear to you. The National Academy, and it's Panels of Experts, are used interchangeably by me and every other intelligent person.

And when those NAS do not personally have their own panel of experts, yet are touted by you anyway.... well, we will just chalk that up to 'because Cypress said these were ok to comment without experts'

My work here is done.

translation... 'I am tired of getting my ass kicked all over this topic. I cannot keep coming up with new ways to feebly attempt to discredit opposing views. I have now painted myself into a corner.... I have stated that 2006 reports are 'dated' (so now I cannot quote anything prior to that without looking like an even bigger idiot) AND I have stated that ONLY SCIENTISTS with experience in the exact field of Climatology/Ecology can provide valid opinions (which just erased all of the government idiots that I rely on for talking points as valid sources).

In addition, I don't know what to do about the fact that my government masters have made bold proclamations such as 'it is scientific fact' and the 'debate is over' that I parrot all of the time. It is really hard to keep parroting that when the head of East Anglia's Climate Research says the debate is NOT over (especially given my proclamation that Jones is UNIMPEACHABLE)'

Not to worry Cypress. We understand exactly the type of person you are. You are a coward. One who enjoys stalking women to the point they leave the board. You are a coward, one who refuses to ever actually address opposing views, but rather runs around creating one straw man after another and then heroically knocking them down.

How do you live life as a coward? It must truly suck to be you. To know you are so pathetic and that death is your only escape, yet trapped by your own cowardice to do anything about it. Truly sad.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Isn't it sad that our resident neocon numbskulls, ever loyal to the corporate dictum, just can't STAND the FACT that the very people they praised in lauded about "Climategate" have retracted and apologized for their errors.

They were WRONG.

But that doesn't stop our feckless climate change deniers....they just plod along with the SOS, splitting hair after hair, bullhorning opinions and ignoring what they don't like.

And ghe beat goes on.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

And while Cypress will give links to actual scientists who are accredited and who can produce their findings, all you can do is whistle Dixie with your opinion, supposition and conjecture. The more FACTS and LOGIC Cypress produces, the louder the insults and opinion laden claptrap from you and your like minded cohorts become.

The very sources you depended on to support your climate change denial had to eat crow...and YOU don't like it! And I ain't whistl'in Dixie on that, as the chronology of the Posts shows.

Yes, I know. All of Prissy's Scientists have to say, and all you have to say, is that it may be possible that mankind might be possibly doing something that potentially could be leading to the increase in global temperatures by 1 degree per century. Collectively, we could probably all rub our hands and knees together for an hour a day, and possibly increase the median temps by 1 degree per century.... maybe!

What you idiots and morons are supporting is a charlatan scam instigated by Al Gore and other idiot alarmists, as a means to bilk corporate enterprise out of billions of dollars, costing consumers billions in return, and making a whole lot of people at the top of your pyramid scheme very wealthy in the process. You won't see any of that money, you'll be one of the idiot proles paying for this stupidity along with your grandkids, who won't be able to even provide your goddamn oatmeal to keep you alive. But you can go to your graves knowing you made Al Gore a fortune!

 

[zappasguitar]

Please allow me to 'illuminate' you... no, actually, let me light that ass up one good time... ALL of your supporting arguments for man-made global warming, are predicated on false data that was manipulated and made to appear as it did, to support the theory. That has been exposed, and now you are all running around in a panic, waving these studies done on false pretense around, claiming they are still legitimate proof of something, when that is asinine on it's face. You might get some really stupid people to buy your phony baloney theory now, and I guess that is what you're after, but I hate to tell you, it won't be enough to make a difference. The overwhelming majority realizes the bloom is off the rose now, and your little theory has been discredited for the fraudulent load of crap it always was.

Gee...Cypress provides link after link of evidence to back up what he says, while you provide...


NOTHING...


I wonder whom I am more likely to believe...

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And while Cypress will give links to actual scientists who are accredited and who can produce their findings, all you can do is whistle Dixie with your opinion, supposition and conjecture. The more FACTS and LOGIC Cypress produces, the louder the insults and opinion laden claptrap from you and your like minded cohorts become.

The very sources you depended on to support your climate change denial had to eat crow...and YOU don't like it! And I ain't whistl'in Dixie on that, as the chronology of the Posts shows.

Yes, I know. All of Prissy's Scientists have to say, and all you have to say, is that it may be possible that mankind might be possibly doing something that potentially could be leading to the increase in global temperatures by 1 degree per century. Collectively, we could probably all rub our hands and knees together for an hour a day, and possibly increase the median temps by 1 degree per century.... maybe!

What you idiots and morons are supporting is a charlatan scam instigated by Al Gore and other idiot alarmists, as a means to bilk corporate enterprise out of billions of dollars, costing consumers billions in return, and making a whole lot of people at the top of your pyramid scheme very wealthy in the process. You won't see any of that money, you'll be one of the idiot proles paying for this stupidity along with your grandkids, who won't be able to even provide your goddamn oatmeal to keep you alive. But you can go to your graves knowing you made Al Gore a fortune!

Poor Dixie.....he thinks that if he keeps repeating these opinion, supposition/conjecture laden diatribes, that people will magically accept them as logic derived from facts.

Poor, Dixie dumb corporate dupe. He just doesn't have the brains, maturity or courage to deal with the FACT that the very people he swore put the kibosh on global warming by "exposing" climate-gate HAD TO ADMIT THEY WERE WRONG...as Cypress showed! Truth to folks like Dixie is like sunlight to a vampire. Let's just watch him whistle Dixie as he loses his mind.

 

[Cypress]

Dear Dixie, Tinfoil, Superfreak, and Bravo:

I'm going to have to lump you together, I can't waste time on individual posts.....Upon another cursory review of the thread, all I see if a bunch of foot stomping, braying, speculation, and guesswork.

I haven't seen any of your yelps backed up by what could plausibly be claimed to be bodies of credible, peer-reivewed scientific work, or backed up by the findings of reputable scientific organizations of international standing.

All I've ever done is provide dozens of links to the world's most prestigious scientific organizations, and their findings and conclusions about climate science. I haven't been prone to substituting my own opinion, conjecture or yelps. Apparently, just merely posting the finding of the world's most prestigious scientific institutions is enough to make NeoCons go rabid and start pounding their keyboards in an irate rage of comedic hilarity.

Tinfoil, you have my permission to keep yelping that "IPCC lied!!!. The very sources you relied on to make those assertions - Rupert Murdoch's London tabloid newspapers - had to issue a groveling apology for lying about IPCC. One wonders if you will ever apologize for lying about IPCC; but if you've found safety and security in your bubble of fact-free rightwing alternate universe, go for it. Science really isn't waiting around for your stamp of approval.

Dixie, as far as I can tell you've been wrong on pretty much everything you've ever posted on this board. If you claim liberal climate scientists are lying and fudging data, the competent person would do well to assume the exact opposite is true. Luckily, I've provided dozens of credible links to debunk your assertions.

SF, you've spent, what, a week trolling wikipedia and google in a flailing attempt to find credible scientific sources that back your assertions that climate scientists are lying, that the current global warming is natural, or that human influence on climate if highly dubious and doubtful. After all that trolling of the interwebs, all you came up with is one dude from the university of delaware. You're all over the map man. You haven't provided any credible links, and your "University of Delaware" source is sheer comedy. It's one dude. And the "University of Delaware" is pretty much a laughing stock int he realm of high-end science. And, as far as I can tell from googling, your Delaware dude hasn't recently published any peer reviewed science in reputable publications that debunks the current state of climate science, or offers a tested and plausible alternative theory. We have a name for guys like that in the scientific community: arm wavers. That means dudes who wave their arms, hypothesize, and offer opinions and conjecture, but they don't have an ounce of their own original research to demonstrate plausible alternative hypothoses.

That's fine if you don't want to accept the findings of the world's national science academies. I suspect it's because you've emotionally attached yourself to science denial, but that's for you to decide. As shown to you repeatedly, the National Science Academies of the world commission panels of their nation's top climate experts and report the findings to their governments and their nations citizens.

That is considered top notch science, and that's why to governments of the world rely on their National Science Academies to provide the best and most plausible scientific advice possible. But, if you want to rely on wikipedia links and rightwing blogs, be my guest. No worries man.

Oh, and finally, Bravo....I don't think I've ever even seen you provide a credible scientific link. Or, when you do, you completely bungle it. All you appear to do is yell and pound your keyboard. So what can I say, man? You haven't posted anything that I can even respond to in any rational and scientific way.

Finally, my take away lesson is that I appreciate the contributions and support of the scientifically literate on the thread. Zappa, high five man. I think Bill Maher said that the job of liberals and the scientifically literate has always been to drag the neaderthal half of the country into the next century.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Blow it out your ass Prissy! Then go take a Drama Queen pill and CHILL!

Your "peer reviewed" scientists were caught red handed, forging and manipulating the data which was the basis for the entire theory of man made global warming. The whole literate world knows of this, and we also understand that you are now desperately trying to save the theory by propping it up with outright lies and disinformation. I don't give a fuck how many "links" you post, I can create about 500 HTML pages on the Internet a day, and make them say any goddamn thing I want them to say! That is not proof something is right or wrong, it's just proof that someone knows HTML, or owns a program that does.

 

[Cypress]

Blow it out your ass Prissy! .........

Finally, as a scientific service to the JPP wingnut community, let me direct you to some credible and legitimate sources of climate science.

I'm not exactly sure why the world's most prestigious scientific institutions make your heads explode. And I'm not exactly sure why - as with the Iraq Fiasco - you continue to rely on sources that lied to you; rightwing blogs, british tabloids, and some wikipedia entry some dude made. Even Rupert Murdoch's London tabloids were able to man up, and proffer a sniveling, groveling apology for lying about the IPCC. Will you ever apologize, similarly? One hopes not! This wingnut crap is comedy gold!


These are the scientific sources I would suggest using, if you have a shred of self respect:

US National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council:

http://americasclimatechoices.org/

NASA

http://climate.nasa.gov/

U.S. Global Climate Change Research Program:

http://www.globalchange.gov/

U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration

http://www.noaa.gov/climate.html

University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (A consortium of the nation's top, preeminent research universities):

http://www2.ucar.edu/

Pew Research Center on Climate Change:

http://www.pewclimate.org/

Hadley Center for Climate Research (the UK's preeminent climate research institute):

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/hadleycentre/

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

LOL, I don't really care how "prestigious" they are, the theory of man-made global warming has been debunked. And obviously, all those sources you linked agree, because not a single one of them can say without any shadow of a doubt, that man is causing the planet to warm. All I see is speculative analysis... We might be possibly doing something to potentially raise temps by ~1 degree per century, but we're not entirely sure. This somehow translates through your pinhead brain, as unequivocal proof! Most of us educated and non-retarded people, don't share your alarmist paranoia.

 

[Cypress]

LOL, I don't really care how "prestigious" they are, the theory of man-made global warming has been debunked. And obviously, all those sources you linked agree, because not a single one of them can say without any shadow of a doubt, that man is causing the planet to warm. All I see is speculative analysis... We might be possibly doing something to potentially raise temps by ~1 degree per century, but we're not entirely sure. This somehow translates through your pinhead brain, as unequivocal proof! Most of us educated and non-retarded people, don't share your alarmist paranoia.

Shorter version:

DIXIE: "I don’t CARE what all the world’s most prestigious scientific institutions say about climate change….I think liberal Marxist climate scientists LIED! That’s my story, and I’m sticking with it!”

Outstanding!

There you have it. No amount of fact, no mountains of evidence, no overwhelming and virtually universal scientific consensus is going to make our resident Flat Earth Society budge from their speculations, assertions, and unfounded accusations.

Reputable scientists who merely did their jobs to the best of their abilities are subject to unfounded smears and personal slander from our comical Climate Gate Clowns. Why? Who knows?! The phenomena of Climate Gate Clown buffoonery appears to be based almost entirely on emotion and a psychological need to merely be opposed to anything that is deemed “liberal” (like science). Here's a tip: If you believe that a world wide conspiracy of lying, liberal climate scientists were out to mislead and lie to their governments and citizens of the world, you are seriously one whacked-out m*ther effer. It might actually take a team of the nation’s preeminent psychologists to figure out why the science-denier cabal are impervious to facts and overwhelming scientific evidence. Or why simple scientific statements from the nation’s top scientific institutions make our teabaggers fly into irate rages of insult-laden and fact-free yelps and hollers.

I'm outta here......Mission accomplished!

 

[Taichiliberal]

Cypress and Zap deserve praise for taking our resident neocon blowhards to task and wiping the floor with them!

 

[Cypress]

I'll Leave it Up to Climate Gate Clowns to Apologize to Scientists

Another Day, another Reputable Climate Scientist Completely Vindicated of Heinous Smears

The Final Penn State University Investigation into noted climate scientist, Dr. Michael Mann, Completely Exonerates Him

THE ACCUSATIONS:
“On and about Nov. 22, 2009, the Pennsylvania State University began to receive numerous communications accusing Dr. Michael E. Mann of having engaged in acts that included manipulating data, destroying records and colluding to hamper the progress of scientific discourse around the issue of anthropogenic global warming.

INVESTIGATORY COMMITTEE CONCLUSIONS:
The Investigatory Committee, after careful review of all available evidence, determined that there is no substance to the allegations of Dr. Michael Mann.

More specifically, the Investigatory Committee determined that Dr. Mann did not engage in, nor did he participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions that seriously deviated from accepted practices within the academic community for proposing, or reporting research, or other scholarly activities.

The decision of the Investigatory Committee was unanimous.

The committee finds that “Dr. Man is among the most respected scientists in his field….his research, from the beginning of his career, has been judged to be outstanding by a broad spectrum of scientists.”

http://live.psu.edu/fullimg/userpics/10026/Final_Investigation_Report.pdf



Dr. Mann’s Hockey Stick thoroughly Vindicated:

Dr. Mann’s “hockey stick” is thoroughly vindicated, and the evidence supporting the hockey only grow stronger year after year…..as corroborated my numerous lines of evidence, and multiple independent data sets:

The Scientific Community and all Enlightened People Will Now Accept Apologies from Climate Gate Clowns and Science-Deniers:

Rupert Murdoch’s papers The Times and The Sunday Times were recently forced to apologise for spreading slanderous lies about climate science and the IPCC.

“In light of this apology from the Murdoch Newspapers, and the University of East Anglia being completely exonerated by investigations from the UK House of Commons, Lord Oxburgh’s Independent Panel and the original peer review, the last nails are now being driven into the coffin of these false Climate Gate Clown allegations.”

“It’s time for climate science-deniers to own up and apologise to the scientists involved."

“We need robust science to underpin Government policy, not a climate of fear where good scientists are afraid to share what they know.

adapted from http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1006/S00451.htm

 

[Cypress]

Clearly, just a bunch of Lying, Communist Climate Scientists

The 2009 statement by the three of the UK’s most preeminent scientific institutions with expertise in climate science: the Met Office (the UK’s National Weather and Climate Service - in the Ministry of Defense), the UK Natural Environment Research Council, and the UK’s Royal Society (the world’s oldest scientific academy in continuous existence founded in 1660).

”As three of the UK’s leading scientific organisations involving most of the UK scientists working on climate change, we cannot emphasise enough the body of scientific evidence that underpins the call for action now, and we reinforce our commitment to ensuring that world leaders continue to have access to the best possible science. We believe this will be essential to inform sound decision-making on policies to mitigate and adapt to climate change up to Copenhagen and beyond.

The 2007 Assessment Report of the UN’s climate change panel (the IPCC) — made up of the world’s foremost climate scientists — provided unequivocal evidence for a warming climate, and a high degree of certainty that human activities are largely responsible for global warming since the middle of the 20th century. However, the IPCC process is based only on information already published and even since the last Assessment Report the scientific evidence for dangerous, long-term and potentially irreversible climate change has strengthened significantly.”

Signed,

UK Meteorological Service
The Royal Society (The UK’s National Academy of Sciences)
The UK Natural Environment Research Council

http://www.nerc.ac.uk/press/releases/2009/29-climate.asp

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Dear Dixie, Tinfoil, Superfreak, and Bravo:

I'm going to have to lump you together, I can't waste time on individual posts.....Upon another cursory review of the thread, all I see if a bunch of foot stomping, braying, speculation, and guesswork.

Translation: "I have been embarrassed by the fact that my own criteria were used to judge organizations that I touted as EXPERTS and have been found wanting. So I will now once again try to deflect the conversation and avoid once again addressing the fact that many of the NAS that I touted have NO experts on climate change working for them."

I haven't seen any of your yelps backed up by what could plausibly be claimed to be bodies of credible, peer-reivewed scientific work, or backed up by the findings of reputable scientific organizations of international standing.

Translation: "I will continue to ignore any and all credible sources OR I will simply proclaim that not enough people have heard of them... that will solve the problem of having to actually read any of the reports that dispute my ignorance. In addition.... ONCE AGAIN I WILL IGNORE WHAT JONES, THE HEAD OF THE CRU STATED. I HAVE TOUTED HIM AS UNIMPEACHABLE AND HE PROCLAIMS THAT THE DEBATE IS NOT OVER, WHICH IS DIRECTLY CONTRARY TO WHAT I CONTINUE TO PARROT. THEREFORE WHENEVER ANYONE BRINGS THIS UP I WILL PRETEND I DONT SEE IT."

SF, you've spent, what, a week trolling wikipedia and google in a flailing attempt to find credible scientific sources that back your assertions that climate scientists are lying, that the current global warming is natural,

NO MORON.... It took me all of a few minutes to provide you with evidence. Once again you will now pretend that everything sourced on wiki is 'outdated/right wing blah blah blah'... it is your pathetic and cowardly attempt to dismiss anything that might contradict your own stupidity.

the debate on AGW is NOT over, no matter how many times you stamp your feet. No matter how many times you try to dismiss peer reviewed reports with such vaunted statements as "not enough people have heard of Delaware's Climate Research"

With such hard core rebuttals as that... how can anyone argue with you???

or that human influence on climate if highly dubious and doubtful.

Had to separate this particular straw man out. Because that is truly laughable. Where have I ever stated that human influence is highly dubious? I have stated that it has NOT BEEN PROVEN (by SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS) that MAN IS THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING.

A point that highlighted by the FACT that you fear mongering morons are now switching desperately to call it 'climate change'. WHY THE CHANGE CYPRESS?

I know... asking you questions is futile as you are too cowardly to ever respond to any of them. Instead you will again create one straw man after another and attempt again to knock them down. It is truly amusing watching you struggle to even knock down your own pathetically weak creations.

After all that trolling of the interwebs, all you came up with is one dude from the university of delaware. You're all over the map man. You haven't provided any credible links, and your "University of Delaware" source is sheer comedy. It's one dude. And the "University of Delaware" is pretty much a laughing stock int he realm of high-end science.

ROFLMAO.... so now the University of Delaware is a laughing stock?????

PLEASE PROVIDE your source for that Cypress.

That's fine if you don't want to accept the findings of the world's national science academies. I suspect it's because you've emotionally attached yourself to science denial, but that's for you to decide.

ROFLMAO... the only one emotionally attached to their position is YOU dear leg humper. You are simply pissed that I used YOUR OWN CRITERIA AGAINST YOUR OWN SOURCES THAT YOU TOUTED.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

still no response from the leg humper.... Imagine that... the coward still refuses to actually ADDRESS the questions posed to him. (Other than his usual diversionary straw men creations that is)

 

[USFREEDOM911]

still no response from the leg humper.... Imagine that... the coward still refuses to actually ADDRESS the questions posed to him. (Other than his usual diversionary straw men creations that is)

It was to be expected; seeing as how he pussed out and ran away, when I used his own words to bitch slapped him on same sex marriages.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

No to none of that. However that doesn't make you science deniars right. I mean Cypress does have a valid point. Your argument has a serious credibility gap. He's naming some of the most prestigious scientific organizations in the world who support the conclusion of anthropogenic climage change. You're quoting a couple of cranks, some right wing blogs and a number of political op-ed pieces. You arguments are very unconvincing to anyone with scientific credentials. Particulary someone with post graduate credentials like Cypress and Thorn.

My argument to you, as a person who admits that they are not well read on this topic is, convince me. Show me the current peer reviewed data that supports your contention. Line your ducks up.

Bump for Mott the scientist

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

paging super Scientist Mott.... come on now... don't disappoint... the above is exactly the type of response you consensus idiots gave to PEER reviewed scientists.

Do also note all of the other questions you idiots ignored and refused to address.....

Then tell us how that crow tastes.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

super duper Scientist Mott???? are you out there???