Al Gore takes aim
Cliff
"Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
[
Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality of
human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that the
problem is real and urgent.
....
]
Doug Miller
>]
And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
eminent climate scientist.
Randy
This from a man whose "house" has a $2500 a month energy bill.
AND who stands to make MILLIONS of $$$ off of cap and trade.
Thank You,
Randy
Remove 333 from email address to reply.
hal
wrote:
He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
Doug Miller
The idea that "all scientists" agree that the problem is real and urgent is
simply a lie. There is considerable disagreement among scientists about the
nature and extent of the problem, and indeed if there even *is* a problem.
hal
wrote:
Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
tunderbar
wrote:
Yep, just like he wishes he were 100 million dollars poorer.
tunderbar
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:45:37 GMT, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >In article <4b8bc33f.1092...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
> >>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:40:38 GMT, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> >>wrote:
>
> >>>In article <okbno55oaudlohjug9m0fbdtk9eio2h...@4ax.com>, Cliff
> >> <Clhuprichguessw...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
> >>>> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
> >>>> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
> >>>>[
> >>>>Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality
> >> of
> >>>>human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that
> >> the
> >>>>problem is real and urgent.
> >>>>.....
> >>>>]
>
> >>>And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
> >>>eminent climate scientist.
>
> >>He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
> >>scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
>
> >The idea that "all scientists" agree that the problem is real and urgent is
> >simply a lie. There is considerable disagreement among scientists about the
> >nature and extent of the problem, and indeed if there even *is* a problem.
>
> Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
> scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
Emphasis on the "if not". Wasn't it at the Bali confab where they
could only find 240 "scientists" to sign a letter to politicians that
was pro-agw?
Doug Miller
I can see that science isn't your thing. News flash: science does not operate
by majority vote.
I can see that truth and logic isn't your thing, either. It's simply not true
that those who do not think climate change is a problem are in an extreme
minority. That is a lie that the liberal left is working very hard to push,
and I see you've been completely taken in. But it's still a lie.
AM
>> And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
>> eminent climate scientist.
>
> He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
> scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
And how convienant that he has made a fortune off AGW. Yet existing
energy companies are bad for making money, but Al Gore is a hero. How
interesting.
The economy comes first, AGW is dead in the voters minds. Get used to
it. The people want real job's. Not the green kind that go overseas on
pipe dream energy ideas (wind/solar) that can't supply power on the
scale we need right now.
--
AM
Claudius Denk
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:45:37 GMT, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <4b8bc33f.1092...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
> >>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:40:38 GMT, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> >>wrote:
>
> >>>In article <okbno55oaudlohjug9m0fbdtk9eio2h...@4ax.com>, Cliff
> >> <Clhuprichguessw...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
> >>>> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
> >>>> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
> >>>>[
> >>>>Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality
> >> of
> >>>>human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that
> >> the
> >>>>problem is real and urgent.
> >>>>.....
> >>>>]
>
> >>>And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
> >>>eminent climate scientist.
>
> >>He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
> >>scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
>
> >The idea that "all scientists" agree that the problem is real and urgent is
> >simply a lie. There is considerable disagreement among scientists about the
> >nature and extent of the problem, and indeed if there even *is* a problem.
>
> Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
> scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
> scientists, "all whom agree".
The number of climate scientists that agree that there is a problem
and who are also willing to discuss this belief and details thereof is
zero. They only release press releases and they avoid any open
forums, like this NG.
This tells me all I need to know. AGW is a scam, through and through.
> There is a huge difference. And
> amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
> decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
> an extreme minority.
This is a retarded statement because the people that are proposing AGW
refuse to delineate the details. Consequently nobody knows who
believes what. You can claim anything you want. (And AGW whackos
constantly do.) Good luck substantiating any of it.
AGW is propaganda. End of story.
hal
<claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>The number of climate scientists that agree that there is a problem
>and who are also willing to discuss this belief and details thereof is
>zero. They only release press releases and they avoid any open
>forums, like this NG.
That's complete nonsense, of course. There's lots of scientists out
there that ARE discussing this, in detail.
>
>This tells me all I need to know. AGW is a scam, through and through.
>
And that tells me you're an idiot that chooses to ignore all the data
that says this is true.
>> There is a huge difference. =A0And
>> amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
>> decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
>> an extreme minority. =A0
>
>This is a retarded statement because the people that are proposing AGW
>refuse to delineate the details.
Nonsense. Read something. Look it up, moron.
>Consequently nobody knows who
>believes what. You can claim anything you want. (And AGW whackos
>constantly do.) Good luck substantiating any of it.
>
>AGW is propaganda. End of story.
>
You're a moron who has no more intelligence than an ostrich sticking
it's head in the sand because that's exactly what you are doing.
The data is all there if you wanted to know the truth.
hal
wrote:
>>
>>Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
>>scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
>>scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
>>amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
>>decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
>>an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
>>by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
>
>I can see that science isn't your thing. News flash: science does not operate
>by majority vote.
No, shit, asshole. Those are your words not mine. The data is all
there, look it up.
>
>I can see that truth and logic isn't your thing, either. It's simply not true
>that those who do not think climate change is a problem are in an extreme
>minority. That is a lie that the liberal left is working very hard to push,
>and I see you've been completely taken in. But it's still a lie.
How many climate scientists can you name that think AGW is a hoax? I
bet you can't name more than one.
James
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:32:46 -0800 (PST), Claudius Denk
> <claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>> The number of climate scientists that agree that there is a problem
>> and who are also willing to discuss this belief and details thereof
>> is zero. They only release press releases and they avoid any open
>> forums, like this NG.
>
> That's complete nonsense, of course. There's lots of scientists out
> there that ARE discussing this, in detail.
Not many. Most hide behind their organisation logos of authotity and
keep quiet. Those that do speak out are usually the ones that are
suspect in chicanery or have so committed themselves to the hoax that
they can't reverse themselves without being looked upon as incompetent.
James
news:a6b94997-95eb-4583...@e1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
Good lord. What does Tipper think of this comic book character?
hal
wrote:
You're completely full of shit, of course.
William Wixon
"Claudius Denk" <claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:95d9fe45-db5e-4829...@o16g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
so what's the consensus as to their underlying motive? *WHY* are they
manufacturing this massive propaganda campaign? there must be a reason for
them to be putting out this propaganda, not just because it's entertaining
to create a hoax.
b.w.
AM
> so what's the consensus as to their underlying motive? *WHY* are they
> manufacturing this massive propaganda campaign? there must be a reason for
> them to be putting out this propaganda, not just because it's entertaining
> to create a hoax.
>
That one is easy. Just follow the money and the politics. It should
become very clear to you then.
We are hurting the environment for ourselves, just how much and what the
solution is are in serious doubt. The politics and where the $$$ is
going with the AGW promoters is not and never has been in doubt...
Steve B
"Doug Miller" <spam...@milmac.com> wrote
>
> And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
> eminent climate scientist.
Pssssst. You forgot the part about sending money to support the cost. And
put some new tires on Al's jet. Being a saint is expensive stuff.
Steve
Steve B
"Randy" <rbra...@enter.net> wrote in message
news:1neno59ua3f84444c...@4ax.com...
Hold off on that last command, Scotty. There appears to be intelligent life
here after all. Kirk out.
Steve
Steve B
<hal> wrote
>
> He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
> scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
I wouldn't be so bold as to ass-u-me that they stand to profit from this
scheme in some way, would you?
Steve
Steve B
"Doug Miller" <spam...@milmac.com> wrote in message
news:hmgge5$a7k$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I don't think that "all scientists" are in agreement that the world is
round, that we actually went to the moon, that 911 wasn't an inside job, and
where the dinosaurs went, either.
Just a thought. What is a scientist? I have a lab coat and some beakers
and a tinfoil hat. I have postsecondary education. Am I a scientist?
And if so, WHERE'S MAH CHECK!
Steve, the scientist
Steve B
NEWS FLASH TO THE IGNORANT - Science is reality based. Thank you for
pointing that out. I know it will come as news to some. Why does Jack
Nicholson shouting, "The TRUTH? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!" pop into my
head?
Steve
Steve B
<hal> wrote
> That's complete nonsense, of course. There's lots of scientists out
> there that ARE discussing this, in detail.
Yeah, and look at all the pollution that Cash For Clunkers program saved us
from. If Al had played his hand a little better and gotten that money, he
could have gotten a new jet. All in the interest of saving the planet and
reducing global problems, dontcha know.
Steve
William Wixon
"AM" <sct...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:E7udnaT1PquqdxbW...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
> That one is easy. Just follow the money and the politics. It should become
> very clear to you then.
>
>
> We are hurting the environment for ourselves, just how much and what the
> solution is are in serious doubt. The politics and where the $$$ is going
> with the AGW promoters is not and never has been in doubt...
>
>
> --
> AM
huh? the money is going to the oil companies and the multinational
corporations. and the banks.
b.w.
hal
Money from whom? You just say "follow the money" but you don't give a
source, so you still don't explain why someone would dump that much
money into creating such a myth. The whole idea, that this is all a
big hoax, is of course, completely absurd.
Doug Miller
>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:58:47 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>>Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
>>>scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
>>>scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
>>>amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
>>>decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
>>>an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
>>>by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
>>
>>I can see that science isn't your thing. News flash: science does not operate
>>by majority vote.
>
>No, shit, asshole. Those are your words not mine. The data is all
>there, look it up.
No, idiot. *You're* the one talking about majority/minority. That's not
science. That's politics. Science doesn't operate by vote, and scientific
truth is not determined by the number of people that believe or don't believe
a proposition. Scientific truth is determined by evidence. And the "evidence"
supporting AGW has been manufactured. It's bogus.
Or haven't you been watching the news the last three months?
>
>>
>>I can see that truth and logic isn't your thing, either. It's simply not true
>>that those who do not think climate change is a problem are in an extreme
>>minority. That is a lie that the liberal left is working very hard to push,
>>and I see you've been completely taken in. But it's still a lie.
>
>How many climate scientists can you name that think AGW is a hoax? I
>bet you can't name more than one.
You lose, fool. Here's over thirty thousand:
http://petitionproject.org
Steve B
"James" <king...@iglou.com> wrote
> Good lord. What does Tipper think of this comic book character?
Talk about waking up in the morning and wanting to chew your own arm off.
Orgasms at their house must last an hour with all the lecturing and ahs and
errrrs. And vomiting.
Steve
AM
So Al Gore doesn't have an political agenda, or $100 million. Or the
billions that have gone to AGW research ?
zzzzzzzzz.............
AM
I didn;t say it was a hoax. Just that look at Al Gore, the scientists,
the billions spent and the politics involved.
Up to the people to draw their own conclusions.
Nonetheless, AGW is dead due to the economy, so all this is really a
moot point isnt it ?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
is dead due to the economy, so all this is really a moot point isnt
it ?
maybe to myopic thinkers like yourself, but not really no.
hal
wrote:
>In article <4b8be0e3...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
>>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:58:47 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
>>>>scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
>>>>scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
>>>>amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
>>>>decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
>>>>an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
>>>>by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
>>>
>>>I can see that science isn't your thing. News flash: science does not operate
>>>by majority vote.
>>
>>No, shit, asshole. Those are your words not mine. The data is all
>>there, look it up.
>
>No, idiot. *You're* the one talking about majority/minority. That's not
>science. That's politics. Science doesn't operate by vote, and scientific
>truth is not determined by the number of people that believe or don't believe
>a proposition. Scientific truth is determined by evidence. And the "evidence"
>supporting AGW has been manufactured. It's bogus.
>
>Or haven't you been watching the news the last three months?
Shit, it's you detractors that are claiming the statements of only one
climate researcher somehow invalidates an entire huge body of data,
that by far most climate scientists agree completely is a very real
and present danger.
>>
>>>
>>>I can see that truth and logic isn't your thing, either. It's simply not true
>>>that those who do not think climate change is a problem are in an extreme
>>>minority. That is a lie that the liberal left is working very hard to push,
>>>and I see you've been completely taken in. But it's still a lie.
>>
>>How many climate scientists can you name that think AGW is a hoax? I
>>bet you can't name more than one.
>
>You lose, fool. Here's over thirty thousand:
>http://petitionproject.org
>
LOL ! "Thousands" of "scientists" (but only a small portion of them
actually have PhDs.) Laugh laugh. But nothing about qualifications.
It's easy to put together a big list of names. It proves nothing.
Basically it's signed by anyone against global warming who doesn't
mind calling themselves "scientists". snicker.
On the other hand, you could actually try going to NOAA and looking up
the fucking data yourself, idiot. It's all there. Need the link?
hal
No, it isn't dead. It's only a question of how bad it's going to get
before you self serving morons wake up and realize what's happening.
hal
>William Wixon wrote:
>> "AM" <sct...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:E7udnaT1PquqdxbW...@giganews.com...
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That one is easy. Just follow the money and the politics. It should become
>>> very clear to you then.
>>>
>>>
>>> We are hurting the environment for ourselves, just how much and what the
>>> solution is are in serious doubt. The politics and where the $$$ is going
>>> with the AGW promoters is not and never has been in doubt...
>> huh? the money is going to the oil companies and the multinational
>> corporations. and the banks.
>>
>> b.w.
>So Al Gore doesn't have an political agenda, or $100 million. Or the
>billions that have gone to AGW research ?
The billions that go to AGW research is in the form of grants, mostly
to universities that do climate studies. The money is used to emply
research scientists, graduate students and post docs, and buy
equipment. It's all money spent in the US btw. It's not wasted or
squirreled away like you would like people to think. It's spent on
scientific research to add to our body of knowledge about our planet.
AM
>> Nonetheless, AGW is dead due to the economy, so all this is really a
>> moot point isnt it ?
>
> No, it isn't dead. It's only a question of how bad it's going to get
> before you self serving morons wake up and realize what's happening.
Ahhhh.... now we are down to the name calling defense.
Cap & Trade is dead, the economy is more important that AGW right now,
and for some to come. Yet you still don't see it.
Enjoy nothing being done Ok ?
Jim Stewart
> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
Cliff, Cliff, Cliff. Surely you can find a better
poster boy for AWG than Algore. Or maybe not.
hal
>hal wrote:
>>> Nonetheless, AGW is dead due to the economy, so all this is really a
>>> moot point isnt it ?
>>
>> No, it isn't dead. It's only a question of how bad it's going to get
>> before you self serving morons wake up and realize what's happening.
>
>
>Ahhhh.... now we are down to the name calling defense.
>
>Cap & Trade is dead, the economy is more important that AGW right now,
>and for some to come. Yet you still don't see it.
Of course the economy is a priority right now, but that doesn't make
all other issues dead. The discussion about AGW will continue to go
one and periodically come to the surface as conditions worsen.
Problem is, it will be too late by the time you people realize you've
been wrong about everything. Sadly, it probably is already too late
anyway.
Claudius Denk
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:40:38 GMT, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> wrote:
>
> >In article <okbno55oaudlohjug9m0fbdtk9eio2h...@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprichguessw...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
> >> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
> >>Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality of
> >>human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that the
> >>problem is real and urgent.
> >>.....
> >>]
>
> >And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
> >eminent climate scientist.
>
> He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
> scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
Gore is their front man so they can avoid debate.
AM
> Of course the economy is a priority right now, but that doesn't make
> all other issues dead. The discussion about AGW will continue to go
> one and periodically come to the surface as conditions worsen.
> Problem is, it will be too late by the time you people realize you've
> been wrong about everything. Sadly, it probably is already too late
> anyway.
No, just cap & traded, and govt takeover of healthcare for now.
Don't worry, with people like you, the world will always be coming to an
end, I'm not worried about that at all. And what if conditions don't get
worse as has happened with AGW before ?
Doom & Gloom is not a way to progress one's desired political wants and
ideology. Must suck to be in the minority like you are.
Meanwhile, the rest of us have more important things to worry about.
Have Fun :)
Bill McKee
<hal> wrote in message news:4b8bc8ce...@news.newsguy.com...
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:45:37 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> wrote:
>
>>In article <4b8bc33f...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
>>>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:40:38 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <okbno55oaudlohjug...@4ax.com>, Cliff
>>> <Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
>>>>> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
>>>>>[
>>>>>Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the
>>>>>reality
>>> of
>>>>>human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but
>>>>>that
>>> the
>>>>>problem is real and urgent.
>>>>>.....
>>>>>]
>>>>
>>>>And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is
>>>>an
>>>>eminent climate scientist.
>>>
>>>He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
>>>scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
>>
>>is
>>simply a lie. There is considerable disagreement among scientists about
>>the
>>nature and extent of the problem, and indeed if there even *is* a problem.
>
> scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
> scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
> amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
> decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
> an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
> by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
He is a spokesman for a company he partially owns that is making millions of
dollars off selling carbon credits.
wmbjk...@citlink.net
<wwi...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>*WHY* are they
>manufacturing this massive propaganda campaign? there must be a reason for
>them to be putting out this propaganda, not just because it's entertaining
>to create a hoax.
>
>b.w.
I bet they'll say it's about money. Not that any of the denialists
could be enriching themselves. <snorf> And certainly not this weasel
in particular, it must all be a big misunderstanding.
http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/02/pat-michaels-climate-skeptic
Too funny.
Wayne
hal
<claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
>> scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
>
>Gore is their front man so they can avoid debate.
I know climate scientists who are happy to debate you.
hal
>hal wrote:
>> Of course the economy is a priority right now, but that doesn't make
>> all other issues dead. The discussion about AGW will continue to go
>> one and periodically come to the surface as conditions worsen.
>> Problem is, it will be too late by the time you people realize you've
>> been wrong about everything. Sadly, it probably is already too late
>> anyway.
>
>
>
>
>
>No, just cap & traded, and govt takeover of healthcare for now.
>
>Don't worry, with people like you, the world will always be coming to an
>end, I'm not worried about that at all. And what if conditions don't get
>worse as has happened with AGW before ?
AGW has never happened before moron. The more you shoot your mouth
off the more you demonstrate you don't have a clue what you're talking
about. Typical conservative.
>
>Doom & Gloom is not a way to progress one's desired political wants and
>ideology. Must suck to be in the minority like you are.
We're clearly destroying our environment and you rightwing nutjobs
don't give a shit about anybody but yourselves.
>
>Meanwhile, the rest of us have more important things to worry about.
Like who you're going to rip off so you can buy some more booze and
ammo?
hal
<bmckee...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>He is a spokesman for a company he partially owns that is making millions of
>dollars off selling carbon credits.
>
>
So? Capitalism is somehow bad if liberals do it? You should be
jerking off to his picture thinking about him making millions selling
anything.
Doug Miller
There's a huge body of made up, fudged numbers. They won't release the actual
raw data, only the *altered* data.
Ask yourself why that is.
J. Nielsen
>You're completely full of shit, of course.
>
>http://www.ntsg.umt.edu/files/5StagesClimateGrief.htm
They forgot to mention the sixth stage:
--
-JN-
AM
>> Don't worry, with people like you, the world will always be coming to an
>> end, I'm not worried about that at all. And what if conditions don't get
>> worse as has happened with AGW before ?
>
> AGW has never happened before moron. The more you shoot your mouth
> off the more you demonstrate you don't have a clue what you're talking
> about. Typical conservative.
>
No, just all those congressmen and women in 1995 saying how bad global
warming was going to be by now. Look on You Tube for yourself. All the
left wing congressional people are there on tape saying this.
And yet.... Nothing has happened...
>> Doom & Gloom is not a way to progress one's desired political wants and
>> ideology. Must suck to be in the minority like you are.
>
> We're clearly destroying our environment and you rightwing nutjobs
> don't give a shit about anybody but yourselves.
>
No, we just don't care about you and your kind. And since you are in the
minority population wise, we don't have to...
How's that doom and gloom stuff working out for you now ?
Cap & Trade is dead. I hope you are happy.
>> Meanwhile, the rest of us have more important things to worry about.
>
> Like who you're going to rip off so you can buy some more booze and
> ammo?
I don't drink or do drugs, just ammo for me :)
BTW, when do you plan on putting me and those like me to the sword ??
Still waiting on that one...
hal
wrote:
>>Shit, it's you detractors that are claiming the statements of only one
>>climate researcher somehow invalidates an entire huge body of data,
>>that by far most climate scientists agree completely is a very real
>>and present danger.
>>
>There ISN'T "an entire huge body of data", you idiot.
>
>There's a huge body of made up, fudged numbers. They won't release the actual
>raw data, only the *altered* data.
>
>Ask yourself why that is.
It's not. That's why. The data isn't fudged. There's terabytes of
data from literally thousands of climate stations throughout the
world. Data from completely different sources, that all says the same
thing and validates each other through the scientific process of
confirmation. The data has NOT been invalidated or fudged. It's all
there if you want to go research it. It's all part of the public
domain. Look it up, and decide for yourself without simply blindly
accepting lies from people with a motive to deceive.
hal
>hal wrote:
>>> Don't worry, with people like you, the world will always be coming to an
>>> end, I'm not worried about that at all. And what if conditions don't get
>>> worse as has happened with AGW before ?
>>
>> AGW has never happened before moron. The more you shoot your mouth
>> off the more you demonstrate you don't have a clue what you're talking
>> about. Typical conservative.
>>
>
>
>No, just all those congressmen and women in 1995 saying how bad global
>warming was going to be by now. Look on You Tube for yourself. All the
>left wing congressional people are there on tape saying this.
>
>And yet.... Nothing has happened...
Well, yes it has. Virtually every glacier in the world has shrunk to
a small fraction of it's size. The north pole ocean is melting in
places it never melted before. Antartica is melting, calving glaciers
at record rates. Mountain peaks that used to be covered with snow
year round are melting off in the summers. Ocean levels are rising.
Low lying island nations are already seeing signs of flooding where
they never had it before. Global temperature means have risen by
clearly measureable amounts. So yes, it is happening. And ignoring
reality doesn't make it go away.
>
>
>>> Doom & Gloom is not a way to progress one's desired political wants and
>>> ideology. Must suck to be in the minority like you are.
>>
>> We're clearly destroying our environment and you rightwing nutjobs
>> don't give a shit about anybody but yourselves.
>>
>
>
>No, we just don't care about you and your kind. And since you are in the
>minority population wise, we don't have to...
Wrong on too many ways to count, asshat. Nice of you to admit you
don't care about anybody but yourselves though. At least you're
honest occasionally.
Bill McKee
<hal> wrote in message news:4b8c0e79...@news.newsguy.com...
There is capitolism and there is fraud. You are too stupid recognize
either.
hal
<bmckee...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
><hal> wrote in message news:4b8c0e79...@news.newsguy.com...
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 10:10:54 -0800, "Bill McKee"
>> <bmckee...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>>He is a spokesman for a company he partially owns that is making millions
>>>of
>>>dollars off selling carbon credits.
>>>
>>>
>> So? Capitalism is somehow bad if liberals do it? You should be
>> jerking off to his picture thinking about him making millions selling
>> anything.
>
>There is capitolism and there is fraud. You are too stupid recognize
>either.
>
>
Why is what Gore does fraud? And is firing American workers and
exporting jobs to overseas sweatshops where people work in unsafe
conditions for pennies a day then taking their shoddy products and
selling them back to the same workers you fired considered good
capitalism?
Wes
><hal> wrote
>
>> That's complete nonsense, of course. There's lots of scientists out
>> there that ARE discussing this, in detail.
>
>Yeah, and look at all the pollution that Cash For Clunkers program saved us
>from. If Al had played his hand a little better and gotten that money, he
>could have gotten a new jet. All in the interest of saving the planet and
>reducing global problems, dontcha know.
I've noticed used cars that are as old as my current car, a 2001 Saturn, are going for
more than I paid for it in 2003 with 31K miles. That cash for clunkers was a real succe$$
for the automakers. Not so much for people needing transportation at a reasonable price.
Wes
Doug Miller
Obviously you *haven't* been paying attention to the news recently.
No, the raw data is *not* there. All that's publicly available is the
"adjusted" data. Adjusted by people with an axe to grind.
Bill Ward
I guess it's time to inject some facts. Apparently you haven't read this:
<http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/climategate_analysis.pdf>
AM
>> And yet.... Nothing has happened...
>
> Well, yes it has. Virtually every glacier in the world has shrunk to
> a small fraction of it's size. The north pole ocean is melting in
> places it never melted before. Antartica is melting, calving glaciers
> at record rates. Mountain peaks that used to be covered with snow
> year round are melting off in the summers. Ocean levels are rising.
> Low lying island nations are already seeing signs of flooding where
> they never had it before. Global temperature means have risen by
> clearly measureable amounts. So yes, it is happening. And ignoring
> reality doesn't make it go away.
We've been through disasters before, we will go through them again. And
AGW's effects are not that drastic right now, much less the solutions
for stopping it. And we have a clean source of energy right now, yet
little is being done about it. (nuclear power) Which tells me that there
is a political agenda that goes far deeper than just pushing AGW on people.
Meanwhile instead of getting soo much warmer in the US as all those
people were screaming about in the 90's, we've been hit with colder
weather. Right or wrongly people are now even more against AGW than ever
before.
>> No, we just don't care about you and your kind. And since you are in the
>> minority population wise, we don't have to...
>
> Wrong on too many ways to count, asshat. Nice of you to admit you
> don't care about anybody but yourselves though. At least you're
> honest occasionally.
>
>
Not wrong at all. Look at the Gallup and others poll numbers. Liberals
are 21% of the population. conservatives 40%
You and your ilk are just a minority of people who've been screaming
environmental issues so loudly, and so long, that people are tuning you
out even when serious issues come up. Thats for ruining it for the rest
of us with your shrill talk.
If people like you could just ditch your ideology for a while and pay
attention and cater to the voters you might get somewhere. But you will
not...
And boy, you sure do get angry, just can't resist the name calling. The
sure mark of one who has lost the argument. If you are educated, then
why can't you use other forms of communication in stead of name calling ?
Your surrender has been accepted here.
Garlicdude
> In article <okbno55oaudlohjug...@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
>> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
>> [
>> Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality of
>> human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that the
>> ]
>
> And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
> eminent climate scientist.
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/24192/
"At the first opportunity for audience participation just several minutes into
the proceeding, a longtime and well-known Apple shareholder--some would say
gadfly--who introduced himself as Shelton Ehrlich, stood at the microphone and
urged against Gore's re-election to the board. Gore 'has become a laughingstock.
The glaciers have not melted,' Ehrlich said, referring to Gore's views on global
warming. 'If his advice he gives to Apple is as faulty as his views on the
environment then he doesn't need to be re-elected.'"
--
Regards,
Steve Saling
aka The Garlic Dude �
Gilroy, CA
The Garlic Capital of The World
Steve B
"Wes" <clu...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:usXin.373825$IU1.2...@en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews.com...
I believe some dealerships are STILL waiting for their checks.
Steve
hal
wrote:
That's nonsense of course. What you are seeing is disinformation.
They've been crunching numbers on the raw data for decades. To
suggest that all the data is somehow lost is ludicrous, of course. You
people really are quite absurd.
hal
What a bunch of crap. First of all, the guy is not a climatologist.
And he's only one person. Will you guys stop listening to fanatics.
The planet is warming, obviously. All the numbers are there. All the
evidence is occurring right before our very eyes. You people are
incredibly stupid.
hal
>hal wrote:
>>> And yet.... Nothing has happened...
>>
>> Well, yes it has. Virtually every glacier in the world has shrunk to
>> a small fraction of it's size. The north pole ocean is melting in
>> places it never melted before. Antartica is melting, calving glaciers
>> at record rates. Mountain peaks that used to be covered with snow
>> year round are melting off in the summers. Ocean levels are rising.
>> Low lying island nations are already seeing signs of flooding where
>> they never had it before. Global temperature means have risen by
>> clearly measureable amounts. So yes, it is happening. And ignoring
>> reality doesn't make it go away.
>
>
>We've been through disasters before, we will go through them again. And
>AGW's effects are not that drastic right now, much less the solutions
>for stopping it. And we have a clean source of energy right now, yet
>little is being done about it. (nuclear power) Which tells me that there
>is a political agenda that goes far deeper than just pushing AGW on people.
>
>Meanwhile instead of getting soo much warmer in the US as all those
>people were screaming about in the 90's, we've been hit with colder
>weather. Right or wrongly people are now even more against AGW than ever
>before.
Weather is not climate. More severe weather anomalies is a predicted
part of the shift in energy in warmer surface water temperatures.
Warmer water puts more moisture in the air and creates more severe
storms in the Eastern US. Including winter storms. That is a
predicted part of climate change. They told you this was going to
happen. Now you're trying to tell them they're wrong at the same time
complaining about the weather.
>
>
>
>>> No, we just don't care about you and your kind. And since you are in the
>>> minority population wise, we don't have to...
>>
>> Wrong on too many ways to count, asshat. Nice of you to admit you
>> don't care about anybody but yourselves though. At least you're
>> honest occasionally.
>>
>>
>
>
>Not wrong at all. Look at the Gallup and others poll numbers. Liberals
>are 21% of the population. conservatives 40%
Gallup is a well known ultra conservative who uses push polls and
selective sampling to give results that favor conservatives.
>
>You and your ilk are just a minority of people who've been screaming
>environmental issues so loudly, and so long, that people are tuning you
>out even when serious issues come up. Thats for ruining it for the rest
>of us with your shrill talk.
"Our ilk" just kicked your ass in the last election moron, and will do
so in the next one too because you people can't come up with anybody
smarter than Sarah Palin.
snicker....
>
>If people like you could just ditch your ideology for a while and pay
>attention and cater to the voters you might get somewhere. But you will
>not...
Gee, last time I checked The President was a Democrat, as was a
super-majority in Congress.
And you clearly can't count.
William Wixon
"AM" <sct...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:E7udnaT1PquqdxbW...@giganews.com...
> William Wixon wrote:
>> so what's the consensus as to their underlying motive? *WHY* are they
>> manufacturing this massive propaganda campaign? there must be a reason
>> for
>> them to be putting out this propaganda, not just because it's
>> entertaining
>> to create a hoax.
>>
>
>
>
> very clear to you then.
>
>
> We are hurting the environment for ourselves, just how much and what the
> solution is are in serious doubt. The politics and where the $$$ is going
> with the AGW promoters is not and never has been in doubt...
>
>
> --
> AM
>
this is the second time i've asked this question (on r.c.m.) and both times
i got non-answers.
b.w.
Doug Miller
No, it wasn't lost, and I didn't suggest that. It was deliberately
*destroyed*.
You really haven't been paying attention, have you? Google "ClimateGate" and
you might learn something.
Doug Miller
Make you a deal: I'll stop listening to fanatics if you will too.
>The planet is warming, obviously.
That's actually far from obvious.
> All the numbers are there.
That's just not true. The numbers that are there are bogus. They are
"adjusted" numbers. The raw data was discarded, and is not available.
>All the
>evidence is occurring right before our very eyes. You people are
>incredibly stupid.
The evidence that's right before my eyes is the eight inches of "global
warming" that I had to shovel off of my driveway a couple weeks ago.
The *fact* is that even the head of the CRC admits that the planet hasn't
gotten any warmer at all SINCE NINETEEN NINETY FIVE.
And yet you insist that the planet is getting warmer. Seems to me that you're
the stupid one here, not me.
Anyway, I'm done. You're obviously unwilling to look at the evidence when it
contradicts your preconceived notions, so there's no point in continuing to
talk to you.
AM
> Gee, last time I checked The President was a Democrat, as was a
> super-majority in Congress.
The key word there is was.... The super majority is gone, and the house
no longer will be democratic after November.
Again, glad you like being the minority @ 21% of the population.
Liberal/progressives have never been a majority in this country.
Never will understand why people like you want the govt to tell you what
to do in life.
> And you clearly can't count.
Lets see here, the democrats no longer have a 60 majority in the Senate.
Three have retired in the house, and one is resigning. Three elections
in a row and democrats have lost. Guess you can't count...
And November elections are coming, and even Pelosi admits to democrats
suffering defeats in the election.
The American people reject massive govt control. Only people like you
can't see it, and believe you are right and the masses are wrong.
Why you want totalitarianism is beyond me.
Good Luck, tho it will not help your cause.
hal
wrote:
>>That's nonsense of course. What you are seeing is disinformation.
>>They've been crunching numbers on the raw data for decades. To
>>suggest that all the data is somehow lost is ludicrous, of course. You
>>people really are quite absurd.
>
>No, it wasn't lost, and I didn't suggest that. It was deliberately
>*destroyed*.
>
>You really haven't been paying attention, have you? Google "ClimateGate" and
>you might learn something.
Isn't that cute? The right wing comes up with another cut buzzword
they can get their moronic followers to parrot, and manufactures
another hatchet job against something that's going to cut into their
profits. Color me surprised. It's all a pack of lies, moron. Global
warming is real and very well documented. So get a clue.
hal
>hal wrote:
>
>> Gee, last time I checked The President was a Democrat, as was a
>> super-majority in Congress.
>
>
>
>The key word there is was.... The super majority is gone, and the house
>no longer will be democratic after November.
Even the chairman of the Republican National Committee admitted the
Republicans will probably stand to lose more seats this election, not
gain any. And he also admitted they don't have much of a chance of
finding anyone capable of running against Obama.
>
>Again, glad you like being the minority @ 21% of the population.
>Liberal/progressives have never been a majority in this country.
The problem is, you don't even understand what a progressive is. You
probably can't accept the simple fact that the framers of The
Constitution were liberals. And if your kind had your way we'ld still
be a monarchy.
>
>Never will understand why people like you want the govt to tell you what
>to do in life.
WE are the government, moron. This is a republic. The government is
whatever we allow them to be. If you people would get a clue and help
we can make the government do exactly what we needed them to do.
>
>
>> And you clearly can't count.
>
>
>
>Lets see here, the democrats no longer have a 60 majority in the Senate.
>Three have retired in the house, and one is resigning. Three elections
>in a row and democrats have lost. Guess you can't count...
>
>And November elections are coming, and even Pelosi admits to democrats
>suffering defeats in the election.
>
>The American people reject massive govt control. Only people like you
>can't see it, and believe you are right and the masses are wrong.
>Why you want totalitarianism is beyond me.
>
>Good Luck, tho it will not help your cause.
Our cause is the survival of The Republic that was founded and
designed by liberals who warned us about people like you trying to
replace our government with your own sick greed and selfishness based
theocracy.
And you losers don't have a chance, because everyone remembers it was
George Bush that destroyed our economy, not Obama, like you people
love to lie about. But that's all you can do is lie.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/20/brown-steele-2010/
hal
wrote:
>>>I guess it's time to inject some facts. Apparently you haven't read this:
>>>
>>><http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/climategate_a
>>nalysis.pdf>
>>
>>What a bunch of crap. First of all, the guy is not a climatologist.
>>And he's only one person. Will you guys stop listening to fanatics.
>
>Make you a deal: I'll stop listening to fanatics if you will too.
>
>>The planet is warming, obviously.
>
>That's actually far from obvious.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
>
>> All the numbers are there.
>
>That's just not true. The numbers that are there are bogus. They are
>"adjusted" numbers. The raw data was discarded, and is not available.
No, the "raw data" was not discarded, idiot. The raw data consists of
millions of terabytes of climate data collected from literally
thousands of weather stations throughout the world for decades.
They've been crunching numbers on this data with the world's greatest
supercomputers for decades. No such data was "lost". That is a
complete pack of lies meant to confuse idiots. Works too
unfortunately.
>
>>All the
>>evidence is occurring right before our very eyes. You people are
>>incredibly stupid.
>
>The evidence that's right before my eyes is the eight inches of "global
>warming" that I had to shovel off of my driveway a couple weeks ago.
Idiot, weather is not climate. More severe weather anomalies was a
predicted part of global warming due to warmer surface water
temperatures adding more moisture and energy to storms cause more
severe weather, including winter storms. They predicted this.
>
>The *fact* is that even the head of the CRC admits that the planet hasn't
>gotten any warmer at all SINCE NINETEEN NINETY FIVE.
That's a lie. The data is all there.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
>
>And yet you insist that the planet is getting warmer. Seems to me that you're
>the stupid one here, not me.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
>
>Anyway, I'm done. You're obviously unwilling to look at the evidence when it
>contradicts your preconceived notions, so there's no point in continuing to
>talk to you.
You are the one not looking at the evidence moron. The data IS all
there. In the public domain. Look it up. Research it a little. But
you clearly don't want to know the truth. You just want to assume
liberals must be wrong to fit your prejudices and ignorance.
Martin H. Eastburn
Every year is climate change. There is procession. :-)
Martin
Martin H. Eastburn
The points of fact of measurements were as bad as can be.
One station next to a smoke stack. Another ..... I saw three or four
in a public statement and there was hung heads on the data base used.
A single station in mid Canada prediction central. What a laugh.
Can you explain why the snow on Mars has melted ? Been there for millions of years.
Solar winds are driving upon us like not before. No one knows why.
Something is going on in the sun and we can only hope it isn't expanding!
When it expands, it will overtake our orbit.
Martin
hal wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:40:38 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> wrote:
>
>> In article <okbno55oaudlohjug...@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
>>> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
>>> [
>>> Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality of
>>> human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that the
>>> problem is real and urgent.
>>> .....
>>> ]
>> And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
>> eminent climate scientist.
>
> He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
> scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
AM
> WE are the government, moron. This is a republic. The government is
> whatever we allow them to be. If you people would get a clue and help
> we can make the government do exactly what we needed them to do.
>
I see that name calling is the only thing you know. A perfect example of
our failed education system you are.
Thats right. A representative democracy. And being in the minority, it
is hard for your kind to get, much less stay elected. Reason that change
is coming. The majority does not see life your way.
> Our cause is the survival of The Republic that was founded and
> designed by liberals who warned us about people like you trying to
> replace our government with your own sick greed and selfishness based
> theocracy.
Your cause ? Wow, you take it soo personally. Tell us how you really feel.
You really are an angry person...
Replace our govt ? no, just bring it back in line with what the majority
wawnts. You believe that your minority has the right to tell the rest of
us what to do. You must not look at Obama's sinking popularity too much,
or listen to Pelosi where she said democrats are going to lose seats in
the November elections.
> And you losers don't have a chance, because everyone remembers it was
> George Bush that destroyed our economy, not Obama, like you people
> love to lie about. But that's all you can do is lie.
>
I have not lied once. Yet you refuse to see the truth. I can't wait for
the elections and being able to rub it in even more then to you.
What fun that will be.
Well back to your name calling again. And you think your low class
behavior is what most Americans want ? Shoot you can't see that is
exactly what they don't want. They see your kind for what you really
are. People who want to run the majority of the peoples lives they way
you want.
How tolerant you progressives are...
Hawke
> In article<okbno55oaudlohjug...@4ax.com>, Cliff<Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
>> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
>> [
>> Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality of
>> human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that the
>> problem is real and urgent.
>> .....
>> ]
>
> And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
> eminent climate scientist.
No, he's not a climate scientist. Just like you're not either. The
difference between you and him is huge though. As a former U.S. Vice
President, he has access to information and to experts that you couldn't
even dream of. Gore never said he knew that much about the science
behind global warming. He never said he was an expert. To be clear, what
he has said is what the most eminent experts in the world on the subject
have told him are the facts. To make it simple for you, it would be like
me telling you that Peyton Manning is a great quarterback. See, I'm just
telling you what all the experts in professional football say. I'm just
passing on what the pros say. So now you know who to blame for making Al
Gore think the planet is getting hot. It's those darn scientists, who
according to an expert like you, have misinformed poor Al. You think we
should believe an ignorant, and untrained schmuck like you instead of Al
Gore. Sorry to burst your bubble but anybody with any brains isn't going
to listen to anything you have to say about global warming. Except maybe
if we want to make fun of you.
Hawke
Hawke
> <hal> wrote in message news:4b8be047...@news.newsguy.com
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:32:46 -0800 (PST), Claudius Denk
>> <claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The number of climate scientists that agree that there is a problem
>>> and who are also willing to discuss this belief and details thereof
>>> is zero. They only release press releases and they avoid any open
>>> forums, like this NG.
>>
>> That's complete nonsense, of course. There's lots of scientists out
>> there that ARE discussing this, in detail.
>
> keep quiet. Those that do speak out are usually the ones that are
> suspect in chicanery or have so committed themselves to the hoax that
> they can't reverse themselves without being looked upon as incompetent.
Can you do us a favor and tell us now what your excuse will be this
summer for why global warming is a hoax? You know, when it's over 100
degrees and new records for heat happen what are you going to say to
make it seem like it's not getting hotter? You guys use the winter
storms this year to "prove" there is no global warming, right? So what
excuse will you use this summer when it's sweltering? It's not really
hot? We're just imagining all these 100 degrees plus days? The
thermometers are all Chinese and aren't accurate? What's it going to be?
Hawke
Dorsai
And.... this has WHAT to do with CNC, again?
C'mon, folks, take it somewhere else, would you please?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dorsai - Author of Erotic Fiction
http://www.asstr.org/~Dorsai
3 out of 4 Americans make up 75 percent of the population.
Hawke
>> so what's the consensus as to their underlying motive? *WHY* are they
>> manufacturing this massive propaganda campaign? there must be a reason
>> for
>> them to be putting out this propaganda, not just because it's
>> entertaining
>> to create a hoax.
>>
>
>
>
> That one is easy. Just follow the money and the politics. It should
> become very clear to you then.
>
>
> We are hurting the environment for ourselves, just how much and what the
> solution is are in serious doubt. The politics and where the $$$ is
> going with the AGW promoters is not and never has been in doubt...
This reason he gives is very revealing. It reveals a lot about the kind
of people the AGW deniers are. They think the people that believe in
global warming are perpetuating a hoax for the MONEY. That's because if
it was them that's what they would be doing. They are projecting on
others their own character flaws. The antis would gladly lie, cheat, and
steal to get what they want so they think everyone else would too. Yep,
I'd say that projecting the greed they themselves have on others reveals
quite a lot about the kind of people the deniers are. Those folks just
don't have any character.
Hawke
Giga2
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 16:44:09 GMT, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >In article <4b8be0e3.8680...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
> >>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:58:47 GMT, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
> >>wrote:
>
> >>>>Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
> >>>>scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
> >>>>scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
> >>>>amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
> >>>>decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
> >>>>an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
> >>>>by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
>
> >>>I can see that science isn't your thing. News flash: science does not operate
> >>>by majority vote.
>
> >>No, shit, asshole. Those are your words not mine. The data is all
> >>there, look it up.
>
> >No, idiot. *You're* the one talking about majority/minority. That's not
> >science. That's politics. Science doesn't operate by vote, and scientific
> >truth is not determined by the number of people that believe or don't believe
> >a proposition. Scientific truth is determined by evidence. And the "evidence"
> >supporting AGW has been manufactured. It's bogus.
>
> >Or haven't you been watching the news the last three months?
>
> Shit, it's you detractors that are claiming the statements of only one
> climate researcher somehow invalidates an entire huge body of data,
> that by far most climate scientists agree completely is a very real
> and present danger.
>
>
>
> >>>that those who do not think climate change is a problem are in an extreme
> >>>minority. That is a lie that the liberal left is working very hard to push,
> >>>and I see you've been completely taken in. But it's still a lie.
>
> >>How many climate scientists can you name that think AGW is a hoax? I
> >>bet you can't name more than one.
>
> >You lose, fool. Here's over thirty thousand:
> >http://petitionproject.org
>
> LOL ! "Thousands" of "scientists" (but only a small portion of them
> actually have PhDs.)
About 9000 IIRC. Anyway it seems you need to have spent many years
locked in a room writing 50,000 words about how some obscure part of
eco-science that interests nobody to swallow AGW unthinkingly (or at
least it helps). This guarantees that the only career skills you have
developed is to make up reams of rubbish that sound vaugly green. Hee
hee.
Laugh laugh. But nothing about qualifications.
> It's easy to put together a big list of names. It proves nothing.
> Basically it's signed by anyone against global warming who doesn't
> mind calling themselves "scientists". snicker.
Same as the AGW lists, just bigger and a lot more credible.
>
> On the other hand, you could actually try going to NOAA and looking up
> the fucking data yourself, idiot. It's all there. Need the link?
Easier just to put the link rather than ask for permission.
dca...@krl.org
> Can you do us a favor and tell us now what your excuse will be this
> summer for why global warming is a hoax? You know, when it's over 100
> degrees and new records for heat happen what are you going to say to
> make it seem like it's not getting hotter? You guys use the winter
> storms this year to "prove" there is no global warming, right? So what
> excuse will you use this summer when it's sweltering? It's not really
> hot? We're just imagining all these 100 degrees plus days? The
> thermometers are all Chinese and aren't accurate? What's it going to be?
>
> Hawke
That is what I like about liberals. Not only are they so smart that
they know what is good for us, but they are able to forecast the
weather months in advance. But if you are wrong, and the high for the
fourth of July is only 69 degrees, then what?
Dan
Steve B
"Dorsai" <Asstr....@gmail.com> wrote
> And.... this has WHAT to do with CNC, again?
>
> C'mon, folks, take it somewhere else, would you please?
New here, huh?
I see you include your sig to your website. Do you have anything to add to
the conversation, or are you just posing your sig ONE MORE TIME, like spam?
And quit crossposting, too.
Steve
Steve B
<dca...@krl.org> wrote in message
news:2850351b-5f40-4938...@o3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Dan
reply: Well, everyone knows that in nature, when things swing one way, they
swing the other. Nature's balance. Global warming/global cooling. It's an
easy reach for a lib. So, I predict our next planetary crisis will come
from global cooling. Unless, of course the thermonuclear war warms things
up a little too much ..................
Steve
Doug Miller
>Well, everyone knows that in nature, when things swing one way, they
>swing the other. Nature's balance. Global warming/global cooling. It's an
>easy reach for a lib.
The thing that I find interesting is that, to the AGW True Believers, all of
these are evidence of global warming:
- warmer than usual summers
- cooler than usual summers
- more hurricanes in the Atlantic
- fewer hurricanes in the Atlantic
- warmer than usual winters
- cooler than usual winters
- more snowfall than usual
- less snowfall than usual
And an unusually hot summer is Proof That The Climate Is Getting Warmer, but
an unusually cold winter is "just weather".
Cliff
>In article <4b8bc33f...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
>>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:40:38 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <okbno55oaudlohjug...@4ax.com>, Cliff
>> <Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>>> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6200OE20100301?type=politicsNews
>>>> "Al Gore takes aim at climate change skeptics"
>>>>[
>>>>Former Vice President Al Gore on took aim at skeptics who doubt the reality
>> of
>>>>human-caused climate change, saying he wished it were an illusion but that
>> the
>>>>problem is real and urgent.
>>>>.....
>>>>]
>>>
>>>And we should all do exactly what Al says, because everyone knows he is an
>>>eminent climate scientist.
>>
>>He is the spokesman for hundreds if not thousands of climate
>>scientists all whom agree that this problem is real and urgent.
>
>The idea that "all scientists" agree that the problem is real and urgent is
>simply a lie. There is considerable disagreement among scientists about the
>nature and extent of the problem, and indeed if there even *is* a problem.
It's interesting that you think the guys with tinfoil hats are "scientists".
Who told you that?
--
Cliff
Cliff
>Emphasis on the "if not". Wasn't it at the Bali confab where they
>could only find 240 "scientists" to sign a letter to politicians that
>was pro-agw?
There were only 240 there?
--
Cliff
Cliff
>>Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
>>scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
>>scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
>>amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
>>decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
>>an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
>>by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
>
>I can see that science isn't your thing. News flash: science does not operate
>by majority vote.
>
>I can see that truth and logic isn't your thing, either. It's simply not true
>that those who do not think climate change is a problem are in an extreme
>minority. That is a lie that the liberal left is working very hard to push,
>and I see you've been completely taken in. But it's still a lie.
IOW it's not getting warmer, the polar ice pack is not melting
nor are the glaciers and crop zones & pests are not changing
and CO2 & methane are not greenhouse gasses.
How do you know all of this fancy stuff? Did Rush or Faux let you in
on the secrets?
--
Cliff
Cliff
>In article <4b8be0e3...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
>>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:58:47 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>Reading for comprehension isn't your thing, I see. I didn't say "all
>>>>scientists agree". I said hundreds if not thousands of climates
>>>>scientists, "all whom agree". There is a huge difference. And
>>>>amongst qualified scientists who have been studying climate data for
>>>>decades those who do NOT think climate change is a real problem are in
>>>>an extreme minority. In other words, since reading ain't your thing,
>>>>by far MOST climate scientists agree this a huge problem.
>>>
>>>I can see that science isn't your thing. News flash: science does not operate
>>>by majority vote.
>>
>>No, shit, asshole. Those are your words not mine. The data is all
>>there, look it up.
>
>No, idiot. *You're* the one talking about majority/minority. That's not
>science. That's politics. Science doesn't operate by vote, and scientific
>truth is not determined by the number of people that believe or don't believe
>a proposition. Scientific truth is determined by evidence. And the "evidence"
>supporting AGW has been manufactured. It's bogus.
>
>Or haven't you been watching the news the last three months?
Were you mentioned as a famous liar & idiot?
--
Cliff
Cliff
>Shit, it's you detractors that are claiming the statements of only one
>climate researcher somehow invalidates an entire huge body of data,
>that by far most climate scientists agree completely is a very real
>and present danger.
>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I can see that truth and logic isn't your thing, either. It's simply not true
>>>>that those who do not think climate change is a problem are in an extreme
>>>>minority. That is a lie that the liberal left is working very hard to push,
>>>>and I see you've been completely taken in. But it's still a lie.
>>>
>>>How many climate scientists can you name that think AGW is a hoax? I
>>>bet you can't name more than one.
>>
>>You lose, fool. Here's over thirty thousand:
>>http://petitionproject.org
>>
>LOL ! "Thousands" of "scientists" (but only a small portion of them
>actually have PhDs.) Laugh laugh. But nothing about qualifications.
>It's easy to put together a big list of names. It proves nothing.
>Basically it's signed by anyone against global warming who doesn't
>mind calling themselves "scientists". snicker.
That "list" is a long-known fake & fraud.
Most on it cannot be found & those that can mostly
denied ever seeing or signing the thing (or were not
in the sciience field anywy).
>
>On the other hand, you could actually try going to NOAA and looking up
>the fucking data yourself, idiot. It's all there. Need the link?
--
Cliff
Cliff
>There ISN'T "an entire huge body of data", you idiot.
>
>There's a huge body of made up, fudged numbers. They won't release the actual
>raw data, only the *altered* data.
>
>Ask yourself why that is.
If they stuffed your head with binary RF transmissions from the
raw data sources it would fry your last 3 neurons.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 23:11:42 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <4b8c258e...@news.newsguy.com>, hal wrote:
>>>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:32:39 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Shit, it's you detractors that are claiming the statements of only one
>>>>>climate researcher somehow invalidates an entire huge body of data,
>>>>>that by far most climate scientists agree completely is a very real
>>>>>and present danger.
>>>>>
>>>>There ISN'T "an entire huge body of data", you idiot.
>>>>
>>>>There's a huge body of made up, fudged numbers. They won't release the actual
>>>>raw data, only the *altered* data.
>>>>
>>>>Ask yourself why that is.
>>>
>>>It's not. That's why. The data isn't fudged. There's terabytes of
>>>data from literally thousands of climate stations throughout the
>>>world. Data from completely different sources, that all says the same
>>>thing and validates each other through the scientific process of
>>>confirmation. The data has NOT been invalidated or fudged. It's all
>>>there if you want to go research it. It's all part of the public
>>>domain. Look it up, and decide for yourself without simply blindly
>>>accepting lies from people with a motive to deceive.
>>
>>Obviously you *haven't* been paying attention to the news recently.
>>
>>No, the raw data is *not* there. All that's publicly available is the
>>"adjusted" data. Adjusted by people with an axe to grind.
>
>That's nonsense of course. What you are seeing is disinformation.
>They've been crunching numbers on the raw data for decades. To
>suggest that all the data is somehow lost is ludicrous, of course. You
>people really are quite absurd.
Some of the "raw data" probably does get tossed.
Once used for data.
If I want an average of readings every 5 minutes for a year for
one point why save the data after computing the avearge?
Probably a bad examle but at some point the statistics of the data
are denser in information. And that's the needed information, now
raw data once characterized.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>
>You really haven't been paying attention, have you? Google "ClimateGate" and
>you might learn something.
The number of fools, idiots & paid liars one can count?
--
Cliff
Cliff
wrote:
>I guess it's time to inject some facts. Apparently you haven't read this:
>
><http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/climategate_analysis.pdf>
>
"John P. Costella" famed self-proclaimed "expert" on the Zapruder film,
right?
--
Cliff
Cliff
>> All the numbers are there.
>
>That's just not true. The numbers that are there are bogus. They are
>"adjusted" numbers. The raw data was discarded, and is not available.
You don't even need any of it.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>
>>All the
>>evidence is occurring right before our very eyes. You people are
>>incredibly stupid.
>
>The evidence that's right before my eyes is the eight inches of "global
>warming" that I had to shovel off of my driveway a couple weeks ago.
That you woud say this is plenty of proof that you ar utterly clueless and a
liar.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>The *fact* is that even the head of the CRC admits that the planet hasn't
>gotten any warmer at all SINCE NINETEEN NINETY FIVE.
Warmest decade ever recorded, last 10 years.
So you must be lying.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>And yet you insist that the planet is getting warmer.
So says NOAA's measurments too.
>Seems to me that you're
>the stupid one here, not me.
All the measurements & science are lies, right?
Even the trees & ice got fooled !!!
--
Cliff
Cliff
>>>All the
>>>evidence is occurring right before our very eyes. You people are
>>>incredibly stupid.
>>
>>The evidence that's right before my eyes is the eight inches of "global
>>warming" that I had to shovel off of my driveway a couple weeks ago.
>
>Idiot, weather is not climate. More severe weather anomalies was a
>predicted part of global warming due to warmer surface water
>temperatures adding more moisture and energy to storms cause more
>severe weather, including winter storms. They predicted this.
The Eastern US now gets about twice as much precipitation
as it used to.
Warmer = more water coming down.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>> >You lose, fool. Here's over thirty thousand:
>> >http://petitionproject.org
>>
>> LOL ! �"Thousands" of "scientists" �(but only a small portion of them
>> actually have PhDs.)
>
>About 9000 IIRC.
But it was all bogus.
They lied to you & were paid well to do so.
--
Cliff
Cliff
<claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>The number of climate scientists that agree that there is a problem
>and who are also willing to discuss this belief and details thereof is
>zero. They only release press releases and they avoid any open
>forums, like this NG.
>
>This tells me all I need to know. AGW is a scam, through and through.
Who would pay them to try to give you a third grade education?
--
Cliff
Cliff
><hal> wrote in message news:4b8be047...@news.newsguy.com
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:32:46 -0800 (PST), Claudius Denk
>> <claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The number of climate scientists that agree that there is a problem
>>> and who are also willing to discuss this belief and details thereof
>>> is zero. They only release press releases and they avoid any open
>>> forums, like this NG.
>>
>> That's complete nonsense, of course. There's lots of scientists out
>> there that ARE discussing this, in detail.
>
>Not many. Most hide behind their organisation logos of authotity and
>keep quiet. Those that do speak out are usually the ones that are
>suspect in chicanery or have so committed themselves to the hoax that
>they can't reverse themselves without being looked upon as incompetent.
>
The numbers don't matter as long a Rush & Faux can tell
you what to think & say.
See how simple it all is without thinking or any sort of education,
reason, facts or research?
--
Cliff
Cliff
>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 16:09:24 GMT, hal wrote:
>
>>You're completely full of shit, of course.
>>
>>http://www.ntsg.umt.edu/files/5StagesClimateGrief.htm
>
>They forgot to mention the sixth stage:
>
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/7344329/Baby-survives-parents-global-warming-suicide-pact.html
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/nations_snowmen_march_against
"Nation's Snowmen March Against Global Warming"
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/northeast_stunned_by_freak_january
"Northeast Stunned By Freak January Snowfall"
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/addressing_climate_crisis_bush
"Addressing Climate Crisis, Bush Calls For Development Of National Air
Conditioner"
http://www.theonion.com/content/infograph/climate_changes_security
"Climate Change's Security Fallout"
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/man_with_food_in_beard
"Man With Food In Beard Saying Something About Climate Change"
http://www.theonion.com/content/amvo/spam_a_global_warming_issue
"Spam A Global Warming Issue"
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/melting_ice_caps_expose_hundreds
"Melting Ice Caps Expose Hundreds Of Secret Arctic Lairs"
HTH
--
Cliff
Cliff
<lion...@consolidated.net> wrote:
>Can you explain why the snow on Mars has melted ?
Like it does every summer on Mars?
>Been there for millions of years.
You were watching?
--
Cliff