UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
care to name some then?
it's so rife with them that you should have no problem pointing out a whole bunch for us.
otherwise, your whole TLDR rant is just more "nuh uh! BULLSHIT!".
pathetic stuff, kkkynes.
Satellite data proves Earth has not been warming the past 18 years - it's stable
- Thread starter sheskunk
- Start date
it's so rife with them that you should have no problem pointing out a whole bunch for us.
otherwise, your whole TLDR rant is just more "nuh uh! BULLSHIT!".
pathetic stuff, kkkynes.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climate-Change-Denial-book.html
one page chosen at random, from the "skeptical science" BLOG (which means it's not a scientific journal. it's as pointless as a celebrity's twatter feed.)
yep, thats some heavy hitting science in there, with highly accredited sources like:
James Hoggan, author of Climate Cover-Up and president of DeSmogBlog
Riley E. Dunlap, Regents Professor of Sociology, Oklahoma State University
James Lawrence Powell, author of 2084 and the forthcoming Inquisition of Climate Science
and the unimpeachable source of record for all things scientific...
Hot Topic
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
yes, Hot Topic. the emo-hipster retail joint found in malls across america.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
8 separate investigations cleared the 4 members of the IPCC in 'climategate', we've been over this yet here you are, again, babbling about it as if it means anything this time
This is one of the dumbest talking points the right argues, for fucks sake it fails on so many levels. Weigh the short term economic benefit over the long term environmental & economic damage just to make a few already outrageously wealthy corporations a little bit more wealthy. You fail to understand that the effects of climate change will have a much greater effect on the global economy in 50-100 years than transitioning to alternative renewable energy sources in the next couple decades, and that's why you deny the credible science that the overwhelming majority of scientists accept
The IPCC is driven by peer review and is backed up by 34 national science academies and 97% of the world's leading climate scientists
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
what in the heavenly fuck does a book review have to do with the science of AGW?
try again, mama's boy.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Your sad attempt at portraying your religion as "science" is amusing.What have 34 national science academies simultaneously been wrong about, ever? Can anyone list anything every single national science academy was wrong about simultaneously?
No they can't
Do you know why?
Because science works.
Science works regardless of your personal belief.
Science works regardless of what you want to be reality.
There is nothing the international scientific community has agreed upon only later to be found out to be bullshit, NOTHING.
The world works because of science. You can type your bullshit pseudo scientific rhetoric all you want, you can't prove it.. That's where you fail and we succeed. We have results, you have bullshit.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
religion requires faith.
no faith at all is required here, it's all peer reviewed science.
have 34 national science academies ever been simultaneously wrong on anything?
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
i would argue that "Working Group 1", the alleged scientists, are agenda driven hacks and tools for "Big-Eco"...8 separate investigations cleared the 4 members of the IPCC in 'climategate', we've been over this yet here you are, again, babbling about it as if it means anything this time
This is one of the dumbest talking points the right argues, for fucks sake it fails on so many levels. Weigh the short term economic benefit over the long term environmental & economic damage just to make a few already outrageously wealthy corporations a little bit more wealthy. You fail to understand that the effects of climate change will have a much greater effect on the global economy in 50-100 years than transitioning to alternative renewable energy sources in the next couple decades, and that's why you deny the credible science that the overwhelming majority of scientists accept
The IPCC is driven by peer review and is backed up by 34 national science academies and 97% of the world's leading climate scientists
but i cant get any information on them.
if only they could get a trust certificate for their webpage...
maybe if they said something trustworthy every now and again they might be able to pull it together.
i dont simply make assertions if i cant examine the data, unlike the IPCC.
look at your own stupid info-grapic, it claims:
39 countries agree with their scheme's "science" which is based on guilt over their own success.
70 countries are slobbering on the UN's cocks trying to get a piece of the "reparations" for the evil success of modern countries
57 countries are clamouring for "mitigation" of the evils of "climate change"
so by their own admission:
39 of 193 member states are on board with their crazy bullshit, that's ~20%
70 countries insist there are "impacts and vulnerabilities" so that's ~49%, but 51% of those agree without agreeing to the "science" (lulz)
but only 33% of countries (57) are willing to do anything about it, but more than half of them are willing to do something about it, despite not agreeing with the "science".
sounds like a religion to me.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
congrats, you are now as dumb as red.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Those numbers don't represent "who accepts ACC", it represents who has contributed to the 5th IPPC report
The overwhelming majority of scientists agree with the findings of the IPCC and that anthropogenic climate change is real, 84% of democrats and 61% of republicans agree with the IPCC. The fraction of people who deny anthropogenic climate change either have a political or financial conflict of interest, are ignorant of how it actually works (most of them), or strictly follow party lines regardless of the topic (also a lot of them)
The overwhelming majority of scientists agree with the findings of the IPCC and that anthropogenic climate change is real, 84% of democrats and 61% of republicans agree with the IPCC. The fraction of people who deny anthropogenic climate change either have a political or financial conflict of interest, are ignorant of how it actually works (most of them), or strictly follow party lines regardless of the topic (also a lot of them)
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
the geocentric universe
"crystal spheres"
the dangers of witches
the bubonic plague was "God's Wrath"
the glacial advance in the middle ages was also "God's Wrath"
the glacial retreat was "God's Forgiveness" up till "Global Warming" hysteria has made it "God's Wrath" again...
yeah, you can get a lot of people to agree to a lot of crazy shit if it's the only theory that is allowed.
other shit that all scientists agreed on, but has been shown to be wrong, just off the top of my head:
the crossbow, machine guns, artillery barrages, shrapnel bombs, total war, toxic gas, ballistic missiles and nuclear-deterrence each in turn making war obsolete.
the safety of tetra-ethyl lead
north korea's inability to manufacture and test a nuclear weapon
the deadly Van Allen Radiation Belt which no-one can pass through and survive
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
really? you cant back that shit up, since the IPCC's website is untrusted, so for all you know the report from working group 1 might have been penned by L Ron Hubbard.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
when did any scientist, much less 34 national academies of science, rule on the science of witches?
do you want to actually answer the question asked, or just pull a palin and answer the strawman you have concocted in that thick racist skull of yours?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Damn! You found me out.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
You are a crackpot
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
the entire "scientific" community of the middle ages agreed, witches were the number one threat to the world.
the Witch Eradication Program continued into the 1600's in some regions.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/mm/
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
i'm not the one posting links to imply veracity which were clearly never examined by the poster (thats you BTW...) since they are demonstrably broken.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Modern science didn't exist until after the enlightenment...
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
The veracity of the IPCC report has been examined by more than 130 countries and 34 national science academies
Epic fail
WORDZofWORDZCRAFT
Well-Known Member
why don't we just block out part the sun with some satellites and then we can have our property rights back?