Wake up call to my fellow AGW skeptics
Claudius Denk
the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
the law. Exposing them won't work because they own
the media. Suing them won't work because they have
a virtually unlimited amount of funds, by way of the
american taxpayer, with which to defend themselves.
Until people like Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt, James
Hansen, and Phil Jones, to name a few, are put into the
position of facing real jail time they will never admit that
there really is no scientific basis for this notion CO2
causes atmospheric warming.
tunderbar
I came to the same conclusion a long time a go. Let the purges begin!
Charles Bash
eye with his views on Global Warming.
When I inquired of him at M.I.T. by phone, he left a brief telephone
message on why I normally can't contact him by telephone.
He included this Snippet :::
>BTW, The Warming ended 8 years ago!
I haven't got back to M.I.T. or Prof Lindzen since that call a couple of
weeks ago.
I regard Professor Lindzen as "The American Denier Emeritus! He heads
up a Department at M.I.T which I believe is called,, "Department of
Atmospheric & Meteorological Sciences" Or something similar { Good a
place as enny to study Warming.}
C. Bash
<<< There Has Been No Significant Warming In Last 15 Years <<< ,,, phil
jones,, 2009 ,,,
<<< DENIERS ,,,, Hang In There.,, The Science Ain't Settled at all!
<<< ,,
Max
"Charles Bash" <C62...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:22521-4DA...@storefull-3111.bay.webtv.net...
Yawn.
When you find something scientifically challenging you let us know OK,
pumpkin ?
Max
Bret Cahill
You need to get into power first so you are irrational as well as w/o
data.
Bret Cahill
Michael Gordge
Ewe have data that proves the globe will get colder when Americans are
paying more tax, beating themslves up, for producing Co2? hahhaha yeah
right, how fucking stupid are ewe man makes the globe hot because he's
not paying enough tax, morons?
MG
Claudius Denk
> Professor Richard Lindzen needs to become More Prominent in the public
> eye with his views on Global Warming.
Hasn't he done enough? He obviously doesn't want to get (further)
involved.
Desertphile <>
<claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Apr 16, 9:31 pm, C62...@webtv.net (Charles Bash) wrote:
> > Professor Richard Lindzen needs to become More Prominent in the public
> > eye with his views on Global Warming.
Lindzen's "views" on global warming are wrong, and he knows it.
> Hasn't he done enough?
He has certainly done much damage to you hysterical paranoid
alarmists nutters' agenda. Lindzen was paid $10,000 to write a
paper that all of his peers at MIT told him was wrong; =AFTER= he
deposited the money he admitted the paper was wrong.
> He obviously doesn't want to get (further) involved.
Your cult through him under the bus.
He was caught lying for pay, having been the bought and paid for
shill for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
Claudius Denk
wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 21:52:31 -0700 (PDT), Claudius Denk
>
> > On Apr 16, 9:31 pm, C62...@webtv.net (Charles Bash) wrote:
> > > Professor Richard Lindzen needs to become More Prominent in the public
> > > eye with his views on Global Warming.
>
> Lindzen's "views" on global warming are wrong, and he knows it.
>
> > Hasn't he done enough?
>
> He has certainly done much damage to you hysterical paranoid
> alarmists nutters' agenda. Lindzen was paid $10,000 to write a
> paper that all of his peers at MIT told him was wrong; =AFTER= he
> deposited the money he admitted the paper was wrong.
It's too bad you can't provide us direct access to your imagination so
we could confirm that.
>
> > He obviously doesn't want to get (further) involved.
>
> Your cult through him under the bus.
>
> He was caught lying for pay, having been the bought and paid for
> shill for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco.
Really? That's quite a serious charge. I wonder why MIT seems to
have not fired him? Are you suggesting the anti-AGW conspiracy is
more widespread? Moreover, do you have an specific references to
support these assertions or are you just babbling as usual?
Desertphile
<claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Apr 20, 3:19 pm, Desertphile <<desertph...@invalid-address.net>>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 21:52:31 -0700 (PDT), Claudius Denk
> >
> > <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > > On Apr 16, 9:31 pm, C62...@webtv.net (Charles Bash) wrote:
> > > > Professor Richard Lindzen needs to become More Prominent in the public
> > > > eye with his views on Global Warming.
> >
> > Lindzen's "views" on global warming are wrong, and he knows it.
> >
> > > Hasn't he done enough?
> >
> > He has certainly done much damage to you hysterical paranoid
> > alarmists nutters' agenda. Lindzen was paid $10,000 to write a
> > paper that all of his peers at MIT told him was wrong; =AFTER= he
> > deposited the money he admitted the paper was wrong.
> It's too bad you can't provide us direct access to your imagination so
> we could confirm that.
Huh? What the fuck? What?
> > > He obviously doesn't want to get (further) involved.
> >
> > Your cult through him under the bus.
> >
> > He was caught lying for pay, having been the bought and paid for
> > shill for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco.
> Really?
Ys, really.
> That's quite a serious charge.
"Charge?" You mean "Demonstrated to be the case from the seized
tobacco documents that are readily available off the internet from
the United States Department of Justice."
> I wonder why MIT seems to have not fired him?
Why the bloody hell would MIT "fire" him?
> Are you suggesting the anti-AGW conspiracy is more widespread?
Huh?
> Moreover, do you have an specific references to
> support these assertions or are you just babbling as usual?
What assertions?
Bret Cahill
> the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
> the law.
That doesn't sound like something a skeptic would say.
Bret Cahill
Claudius Denk
Are you suggesting I'm an imposter?
Claudius Denk
wrote:
Because, according to you, he was, "caught lying for pay."
> > Are you suggesting the anti-AGW conspiracy is more widespread?
>
> Huh?
If MIT knowingly employed a professor that was, according to you,
"caught lying for pay," then they would have to be part of wider
conspiracy. Right?
>
> > Moreover, do you have an specific references to
> > support these assertions or are you just babbling as usual?
>
> What assertions?
As I suspected, you were just babbling. Lindzen was never "caught
lieing for money," was he? Admit it.
Dawlish
"my fellow AGW sceptics". <alughing> You are deluded there as well
denky. You are an outright climate denier.
Dawlish
You are an imposter. You are an idiot posing as someone who
understands more than tens of thousands of climate scientists and
hundreds of thousands of physicists. Doesn't that make you consider
that your belief on this subject may just be a little bit shaky,
denky?
Harry Chest
> The only way this is going to end is if perpetrators of
> the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
> the law.
Screw the law, we'll make it up as we go along and we'd better be sure
to see all the fossil fuel providers generously compensated for the
damaged caused by the religion of science. Now that Professor Tim
Ball is in charge we can declare victory and order all scientists
silenced while finally banning Communist sustainable energy technology
once and for all. it's what Allah would do. Then we'll ban all
socialism and leftism once and for all time so we can commence living
in the new Libertarian utopia!
Last Post
ø Ho Ho Ho Bret Jackass Cahill — clueless and ignorant as usual
Find your self in the sig below
— —
There are three types of people that you
can_not_talk_into_behaving_well. The
stupid, the religious fanatic, and the evil.
1- The stupid aren't smart enough to follow the
logic of what you say. You have to tell them
what is right in very simple terms. If they do
not agree, you will never be able to change
their mind.
2- The religious fanatic: If what you say goes
against their religious belief, they will cling
to that belief even if it means their death.
3- There is no way to reform evil- not in a
million years. There is no way to convince
anthropogenic_global_warming_alarmists,
terrorists, serial killers, paedophiles, and
predators to change their evil ways, They
knew what they were doing was wrong, but
knowledge didn't stop them. It only made
them more careful in how they went about
performing their evil deeds.˙
Dawlish
>
> - Show quoted text -
Did you say something?
Desertphile
<BretC...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
> > The only way this is going to end is if perpetrators of
> > the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
> > the law.
aka "Jewish Science."
> That doesn't sound like something a skeptic would say.
A Nazi might.
Daryl McCullough
>
>On Apr 24, 3:56=A0pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
>> > The only way this is going to end is if perpetrators of
>> > the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
>>
>> That doesn't sound like something a skeptic would say.
>>
>> Bret Cahill
>
>Are you suggesting I'm an imposter?
He's being very polite about it, but yes, he's saying
that it's insane for you to call yourself a "skeptic"
if you are in favor of jailing people who disagree with
your conclusions. That's a "fanatic", not a "skeptic".
--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY
Bret Cahill
> > > the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
> > > the law.
>
> > That doesn't sound like something a skeptic would say.
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> Are you suggesting I'm an imposter?
No. Being an imposter requires some smarts.
Bret Cahill
Tom P
Yeah, right, let's put them in Guantanamo. 24 hour isolation, strip
searches and a little waterboarding every day should soften them up.
A military tribunal is the only way to deal with this kind of
criminals. They are a threat to American democracy and the GOP.
What's that, Guantanamo is full of innocent people being kept captive
for no reason? Ok, let's turn them over to the Holy Roman Church.
A little breaking on the wheel and hanging up side down in chains
should get them to confess. And while they're at it, we could get them
to admit that the world is flat and the planets go round in epicycles.
Then burn them at the stake. Let them get a whiff of their own CO2
emissions while they're warming the planet...
Claudius Denk
wrote:
I'm in favor of jailing people that break the law.
Desertphile
McCullough) wrote:
> Claudius Denk says...
> >On Apr 24, 3:56=A0pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
> >> > The only way this is going to end is if perpetrators of
> >> > the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
> >> > the law. =A0
> >>
> >> That doesn't sound like something a skeptic would say.
> >Are you suggesting I'm an imposter?
> He's being very polite about it, but yes, he's saying
> that it's insane for you to call yourself a "skeptic"
> if you are in favor of jailing people who disagree with
> your conclusions. That's a "fanatic", not a "skeptic".
Nor can Denk in any way be considered a skeptic: he believes
whatever his cult orders him to believe, without hesitation and
without question. Several Creationists also call themselves
"skeptics," for exactly the same reason.
Desertphile
Nutter.
Desertphile
wrote:
> On 04/17/2011 05:11 AM, tunderbar wrote:
> > On Apr 16, 11:55 am, Claudius Denk<claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> The only way this is going to end is if perpetrators of
> >> the AGW fraud are prosecuted to the fullest extent of
> >> the law. Exposing them won't work because they own
> >> the media. Suing them won't work because they have
> >> a virtually unlimited amount of funds, by way of the
> >> american taxpayer, with which to defend themselves.
> >> Until people like Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt, James
> >> Hansen, and Phil Jones, to name a few, are put into the
> >> position of facing real jail time they will never admit that
> >> there really is no scientific basis for this notion CO2
> >> causes atmospheric warming.
How very odd that all of the experts on the subject say the exact
opposite. Golly.
> > I came to the same conclusion a long time a go. Let the purges begin!
Jewish Science.
> Yeah, right, let's put them in Guantanamo. 24 hour isolation, strip
> searches and a little waterboarding every day should soften them up.
>
> A military tribunal is the only way to deal with this kind of
> criminals. They are a threat to American democracy and the GOP.
>
> What's that, Guantanamo is full of innocent people being kept captive
> for no reason? Ok, let's turn them over to the Holy Roman Church.
>
> A little breaking on the wheel and hanging up side down in chains
> should get them to confess. And while they're at it, we could get them
> to admit that the world is flat and the planets go round in epicycles.
> Then burn them at the stake. Let them get a whiff of their own CO2
> emissions while they're warming the planet...
You think you are being ironic, but I have no doubt "Denk" likes
your suggestions.
leona...@gmail.com
wrote:
> > On 04/17/2011 05:11 AM, tunderbar wrote:
> > Then burn them at the stake. Let them get a whiff of their own CO2
> > emissions while they're warming the planet...
>
> You think you are being ironic, but I have no doubt "Denk" likes
> your suggestions.
ø Ho Ho Ho that's rich!!!
The globe has never been warmer (1ºC) since
the end of the "Little Ice Age" and is rapidly
trending downward.
The current ice age is 1,600 years old and
the ice will begin inching toward the
Equator ± 2020 and 2050.
—— ——
erschro...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Apr 27, 9:12 pm, De Shit Pile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> wrote:
>
> > > On 04/17/2011 05:11 AM, tunderbar wrote:
> > > Then burn them at the stake. Let them get a whiff of their own CO2
> > > emissions while they're warming the planet...
>
> > You think you are being ironic, but I have no doubt "Denk" likes
> > your suggestions.
>
> ø Ho Ho Ho that's rich!!!
> The globe has never been warmer (1ºC) since
> the end of the "Little Ice Age" and is rapidly
> trending downward.
>
> The current ice age is 1,600 years old and
> the ice will begin inching toward the
> Equator ± 2020 and 2050.
>
Some people see things that are, and ask "why"?
Leonard sees things that are not, and asks "why can't I just make them
up"?