Pence: I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution
Pence: I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution
Last month, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) announced the creation of the House GOP American Energy Solutions Group, which will “work on crafting Republican solutions to lower energy prices for American families and small businesses.” Undermining the seriousness of the task force, the GOP announced that it was appointing climate change denier Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to the group.
Another member of the organization is Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN). In a contentious debate with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews today, the third-ranking House Republican claimed that the science behind climate change is “mixed.” Pence did, however, admit that it is “fair” to question whether that makes him a discredited messenger on energy issues:
PENCE: Well let me tell you. I think the science is very mixed on the subject of global warming, Chris.
Q: Then why should your party believe you’re going to get serious about it, if you say the science is mixed?
PENCE: Yeah, it’s a fair question. But look. I’m all for clean air. I’m all for clean coal technology. I’m sure reducing CO2 emissions would be a positive thing.
“In the mainstream media, there is a denial of the growing skepticism in the scientific community on global warming,” Pence bellowed. Watch it:
It’s unclear what “growing skepticism” on man-made climate change Pence is seeing. But his anti-science tirade was just beginning. Pence then defended his party’s opposition to embryonic stem cell research, falsely claiming there were alternatives that “obviated” the need for embryonic research. And when Matthews pressed Pence on whether he believes in evolution — an undeniable fact and the foundation of biology — Pence said he believes in creationism:
PENCE: Uh, do I believe in evolution? I embrace the view that God created the Heavens and the Earth, the Seas and all that’s in them. The means that he used to do that, I can’t say, but I do believe in that fundamental truth.
“Did you take biology in school?” asked an incredulous Matthews. “If your party wants to be credible on science, you gotta accept science. … I don’t think your party is passionately committed to science, or fighting global warming, or dealing with the scientific facts we live with.”
“Tell me what you really think, Chris,” Pence retorted. “This anti-science thing is a little bit weak.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
As annoying as he can be, you gotta like Tweety when he gets a hold of a moron.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:24 pmShorter Pence: Of course I don’t use my brain. It makes me a natural conservative…
May 5th, 2009 at 6:24 pmPence believes in creationism, but is not anti-science? What a twit.
No, the science is not “very mixed” on the subject of climate change, halfwit.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:31 pmI would find these comments sad coming from an adult of average intelligence. Hell, I would find these comments sad coming from a child of average intelligence. But, to think that in America in the 21st century, such a backwards person can actually come to be a Congress person is just beyond belief.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:33 pmPence and Bachman were home schooled – They taught themselves.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:33 pmThis kind of thinking goes a long way to explaining why it only took the Church 400 odd years to admit he really wasn’t a heretic.
How does a person like this survive in the world, much less get elected to Congress?
May 5th, 2009 at 6:34 pmPence isn’t anti-science, that is, if you count Bible study as a science!
May 5th, 2009 at 6:35 pmHe being Galileo.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:35 pmPlus, just to deflect the inevitable trollish cries of “sun spots”, the sun has been getting dimmer through the last 55-100 years depending on what measurements are used.
In fact, it’s been getting dimmer through the most severe and rapid effects of global warming. So? The sun spot argument has just as much validity as “Goddidit”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8008473.stm
May 5th, 2009 at 6:37 pmDoes Pence believe in the airplane?
May 5th, 2009 at 6:38 pmI try to imagine what the U.S. looks like to other countries. A country with a large population that considers it ridiculous that humans can significantly impact the environment, with a large nuclear arsenal—whew.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:39 pmMan, Chris took him out for a ride and dropped him off somewhere between less than credible and stupid.
Pence is worse than the blowhards like Limbaugh who speak out against evolution, global warming, etc.
He “muddies” the water with half truths, refuses to answer the questions Matthews posed to him, and deflates any real scientific advancement.
Global warming has been proven. It’s not a “theory”. It’s a fact that’s been proven over and over again. There are no scientists who disagree with it who do not have an axe to grind for the neoconservatives.
Thankfully, Matthews took him out for a nice long ride.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:39 pmyeah! I love a little straight talk with Chris! I wish he would stay in reality world more consistantly.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:40 pm@10 Arctic Ghetto Says:
not if they go so near to the edge of the earth that they might fall off.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:41 pmIncidentally, the most screwed of all republicans usually turn out to be religous extremists. I’m thinking republicans hung on to all the bad things religion has to ‘offer’.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:43 pmNo, Congressman, this “anti-science thing” is not weak at all.
You didn’t say a single thing in defense of science or the ability of scientific inquiry to come up with real-world solutions to serious problems.
When asked about evolution, you refused to affirm your acceptance of it.
What is weak, sir, is your own response.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:44 pmMike Pence is the biggest horse ass on the planet, and Chris just gave him the what-fer. Good for him. I wish we could see this Mathews more often, because no one-not wondergirl Rachel Maddow, certainly not anyone who covers Capitol Hill on a beat-can take apart a bully like he can. Well, maybe Jon Stewart. But you get the idea. When Mathews is good he is very, very goos, but when he is bad…
May 5th, 2009 at 6:44 pm“I would find these comments sad coming from an adult of average intelligence. Hell, I would find these comments sad coming from a child of average intelligence. But, to think that in America in the 21st century, such a backwards person can actually come to be a Congress person is just beyond belief.”
This is worth repeating. I remember reading about how people obviously want the smartest doctors and lawyers should they need one. But, for politicians, intelligence isn’t highly valued. Just look at how Gore lost to Bush. They always said Bush was the guy you wanted to have a beer with. Well, we saw where this attitude has gotten us.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:44 pmRepublicans are religious for all the wrong reasons.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:45 pm“Pence: I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution”
How people can believe in something they can’t prove to be real but is something you think or feel is real and at the same time deny something that’s real proven and backed up with evidence, amazes me.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:45 pmOMG!!! “Undermining the seriousness of the task force, the GOP announced that it was appointing climate change denier Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to the group.”
This LUNATIC has been appointed, by Boner to find solutions to ‘lower the cost of energy’ for Americans! They must be kidding due to the fact that she:
1. IS CRAZY,
2. DOESN’T BELIEVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE,
3. WOULD NOT KNOW A SOLUTION IF IT BIT HER, and
4. BELIEVES SHE IS A RATIONAL HUMAN BEING.
There is serious medical reasons to have all the remaining members of GOP mentally evaluated because they truly are derranged. This is definitely the blind leading the blind in the river of madness.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:45 pmRep. Pence went to a religious “school” and went on to become a lawyer. We really need to cut these freaks out of the loop when it comes to scientific discussions.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:46 pm@20 08Dariana Says:
I bet they each had a very early indoctrination, with plenty of booster shots along the way. Same for all extreme theologies i guess. They seem impenetrable.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:49 pm@20 08Dariana Says:
These are people, not acting out of free will, but out of pre programming.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:50 pmThis all goes back to my plan for making politician’s pass “exams” prior to running for office.
Exams just like you’d take if you wanted to fly an airplane, or become an attorney.
You have to know the material.
And if you’re going to lead people in the US, then you need to demonstrate that you’re at least reasonably educated in Math, Science, Political Science, Philosophy, the Arts, etc.
Sort of a “G.E.D” if you will for elected officials.
Becoming a member of the Congress is not a right. It’s a privilege that has to be earned. No one lets you drive a car without taking an exam. Hence no on should be permitted to drive an entire state, without some sort of exam to make sure they’re at least reasonably educated on the accumulated wisdom and knowledge of the people they wish to lead.
The republican party committed a great sin in mingling religion with government. Government has no role in religion beyond facilitating the free exercise thereof and protecting from religious discrimination or persecution. Beyond that, mingling religion with government is a time proven recipe for disaster. Whenever we see religious factions weasel their way into government, we see disaster. The Taliban are a prime example, as was the Church Of England, the Protestant witch hunts of Salem, the Inquisitions and the Suppression of Heresy in the mother Church at Rome, etc.
The last 8 years of disaster wrought by the Bush administration was the direct result of mingling religious belief systems with government. And as always, it lead to disaster and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.
It was a crime, and I’m glad to see Matthew’s holding them accountable for it.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:51 pmPence then defended his party’s opposition to embryonic stem cell research, falsely claiming there were alternatives “obviated” the need for embryonic research.
Actually this claim isn’t far from the truth. Scientists at Scripps Research Institute announced last week that they had perfected a method for changing adult stem cells into embryonic stem cells; but that doesn’t obviate the need for embryonic research, by a long shot.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:53 pmPence and Sessions — Tweedledee and Tweedledum of the Senate.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:53 pmNot only are they stupid, but they are stubbornly so.
Despite the obvious politics of this blog, it should be painfully obvious to you folks that to be skeptical of claims being made by folks like Al Gore does not mean that you are “ant-science”!
In fact, it’s just the opposite. There is a tremendous body of evidence and peer-reviewed scientific articles that one has to totally IGNORE in order to claim that the scienceis “settled” with respect to man-made global warming!
C’mon folks. Be Honest! Try this site for starters:
http://www.co2science.org/
May 5th, 2009 at 6:55 pmI know ten year olds who are more intelligent than Pence – but that’s Pence’s problem right? — he wants to keep kids ignorant, getting all their education from the Bible.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:55 pmIt was faith that got us to the moon. Faith in science that is.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:55 pmWAYNEBRO,
If exams are going to be required to run for office, then we desperately need them for VOTERS as well!!!
May 5th, 2009 at 6:56 pmPence says, . . . But I don’t believe in global warming, stem cell research or evolution.
I say, “WE DON’T BELIEVE IN REPUBLICONS, but we believe in global warming, stem cell research or evolution.”
May 5th, 2009 at 6:57 pmWrong.
Being a senator is not a right.
Voting for one, is.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:57 pmas a retired science teacher i give him an F
KMAMF
May 5th, 2009 at 6:57 pmVery true, WAYNEBRO. I don’t think there’s a GOoPer left who could pass a junior-high science test.
But, you left out the ongoing Crusade of American Evangelicals against Islam. They didn’t learn the lessons of the past and are, sure as Hell, repeating the same mistakes. One would think that any thinking person would realize that Crusades always end badly for everyone. Alas, the GOP is devoid of thinking persons. More like a gang of scheming weasels.
May 5th, 2009 at 6:58 pmpete,
You would definitely benefit from some reading up on real scientific studies about the effects of the Sun on our climate.
Start here:
http://www.co2science.org/
May 5th, 2009 at 6:59 pmWaynebro, Your point of passing an entrance exam is well taken, but one could argue that the politician did pass an exam of sorts when he was elected by his constituents.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:00 pmIgnorant people vote. Ignorant people elect people like themselves. Ignorant people are afraid of people who are smart (Obama is an example).
pete,
From your last post it appears you are also woefully ignorant of the history of the crusades as well!!
The lessons we could learn today from what caused the wars collectively known as the Crusades would help us understand what Western civilization and Christianity in particular is up against with respect to Islam!
May 5th, 2009 at 7:02 pmI have to agree, a bit, with Timmeh. We should not depend on non-scientists for our data and shouldn’t let non-scientists interpret that data. Speaking of data, check out this site and make your own conclusions.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/
May 5th, 2009 at 7:02 pmPete, there is no division in the scientific community on the fact of Global warming.
None.
The only “scientists” discounting it are like the “doctors” who discounted the notion that smoking cigarettes caused cancer.
They said it because they were paid by the tobacco companies.
And the scientists you are quoting are paid by the oil companies.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:02 pmSorry, that wasn’t for you Pete. I meant “TIM”.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:02 pmBut, you left out the ongoing Crusade of American Evangelicals against Islam. They didn’t learn the lessons of the past and are, sure as Hell, repeating the same mistakes.
Careful now with that loose talk, Pete. You’re skating awfully close to the edge of progressive political correctness. We’re not supposed to bring up stuff like that, now that TP has a new Correctness Monitor.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:02 pmCorrectness Monitor?
May 5th, 2009 at 7:04 pmTim Vaculik Says:
If you could step out of that stupid bubble that you and the other 20%ers reside in, you would see how stupid you sound. There is no argument. I am a Christian, raised in the Southern Baptist faith and I have absolutely no problem reconciling scientific facts with the stories in the Bible. Please watch and old black and white flick with Spencer Tracey, “Inherit the Wind”. It is amazing the wingnuts are still arguing the same stupid argument after all these years.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:04 pmThe saddest thing about these gop morons is the fact that they’re on TV talking about issues they know absolutely nothing about, while the moronic hosts never call them on their bullsh*t.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:04 pmHoodathunktick Says:
Correctness Monitor?
He knows who I’m talking about.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:05 pmThis is true. But when one tries to dispute the findings of actual climate scientists by attributing them to Al Gore, one loses all credibility in the debate.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:06 pmWell one could argue that but it wouldn’t make it valid.
I’m not talking about an “exam of sorts”.
I’m talking about sitting down at a desk with a pencil and paper or computer, and taking an actual exam on issues that he will be leading the people on.
Here’s a sample question.
The earth is approximately “x” years old.
A. 4.5 Billion Years
B. 6000 years
Answer A would be right.
Anyone answering “B” would not be intelligent enough to qualify for office.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:06 pmScary chart, pete. A lot of people who were thrown off by winter might reconsider this summer.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:07 pmAt least Matthews tried a little to press Pence the dunce.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:07 pmSo looks like Pence insists that earth was made in seven days.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:07 pmOr is it all for show? Pence is the guy who wants to inject religion into politics, then when he gets the chance he clams up. Pence is not playing straight.
WAYNEBRO,
Your statement is simply false:
Why do you and others here simply refuse to consider ALL the science, hmmmm? What are you afraid of?
Your statement is really the statement of a “true believer”. You don’t CARE what the science says. You don’t CARE because you want to BELIEVE something is true.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:09 pmI’ve studied the Crusades for 40 years, Timmeh. None of them had any positive lasting effects and all of them, aside from those killed directly, resulted in hardships for all parties. And that’s not even including the plague outbreaks associated with some of them.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:09 pmTim, I wouldn’t get too carried away about the history of the Crusades. The end result was Christianity spent a lot of money, lost a lot of lives and Islam got control of the Middle East.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:10 pmgawd is creating global warming because the poor people are cold from loosing their houses due to the Republican’t created recessions/depression. And that “science” thing (which is really witch craft modernized) only proves things that we need it to prove or disprove.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:11 pmWell survival of the fittest might bit this idiot in the butt when Earth reaches one of many tipping points and his state is under water for a portion of every year.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:11 pmWAYNEBRO,
Sorry, my friend, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts. Your statement simplr regurgitates a pretty tired line. It’s lazy and uninformed to say what you have said.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:12 pmHoodathunktick,
Yeah, but they took back Spain!
May 5th, 2009 at 7:13 pm2. Ur-Fascism rejects the modern world
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVVa1IvHdKc
Both Fascists and Nazis worshipped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon blood and earth (Blut und Boden).
The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life. The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.
Fourteen Warning Signs of a Fascist State
May 5th, 2009 at 7:14 pm-by Umberto Eco
ralph,
Al Gore is shorthand…
May 5th, 2009 at 7:14 pmPete, notice any difference between your link, and Vaculik’s?
At the top of his link’s page, they offer dvd’s for sale, with their perspectives. I didn’t see any dvd’s for sale at yours.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:14 pmTim, we have two choices. Listen to the ever growing scientific information that mankind has had a serious impact on the environment or listen to the much smaller group who says it isn’t so.
The problem is if the first group is right, we will be having much larger problems in the next decade or two and the solutions will get more expensive and iffy. I don’t think we will get a mulligan on this one.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:15 pmPence: “I’m not stupid, I just don’t know nuthin”.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:15 pmThis interview says so much about the people who vote for these jokers.
So much for the CO2 Science link Tim:
The Center’s current mission is to “disseminate factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content.”
The Center means of disseminating information, their magazine and website CO2 Science, includes articles both questioning the existence of climate change as well as touting the benefits to the biosphere from carbon dioxide enrichment. All aspects of climate change and its predicted effects – from melting ice caps to species extinction, to more severe weather – are criticized by the Center and either refuted or presented as beneficial. Fred Palmer, head of Western Fuels, said about the center: “The Center’s viewpoint is a needed antidote to the misleading and usually erroneous scientific claims emanating from the Federal scientific establishment and adopted by leading politicians, such as Vice President Al Gore.” The Center has since tried to distance itself from the Western Fuels Association, however, the Center is run by Keith and Craig Idso, along with their father, Sherwood. Both Idso brothers have been on the Western Fuels payroll at one time or another. Keith Idso, then a doctoral candidate at the University of Arizona, was a paid expert witness for Western Fuels Association at a 1995 Minnesota Public Utilities commission hearing in St. Paul, MN, along with MIT’s Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels, and Robert Balling (The Heat is On). According to news from Basin Electr ic, a Western Fuels Association member, Craig Idso produced a report, “The Greening of Planet Earth.” Its Progression from Hypothesis to Theory,” in January 1998 for the Western Fuels Association (Basin Electric Latest News no date given).
Who’s being fooled? The website even lists 8 scientific advisors, from many disciplines. For context and TRUTH, this is from a 2007 Scientific American article:
How can we cope with global warming and the challenges it poses? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just completed its fourth assessment of the science of climate change, its impacts and possible solutions. The panel of 2,500 scientists and other experts declared manmade warming “unequivocal” and wrote that it could lead to climate changes that are “abrupt and irreversible.”
So you’re going to tell me this group of 2500 have same corporate conflict of interests as your real science? Seems like you want to BELIEVE something is true. The sad thing is, you’re easily dismissed by anyone with a computer and 5 minutes on their hand. Pathetic.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:16 pmTim Vaculik Says:
Yeah, but they took back Spain!
Wow.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:17 pmGreat post. We don’t hear enough comments like these.
What people like Pence will never get is the difference between belief and dogma. There are millions of Christians, Muslims and Jews who have no problem correlating what we learn from science and their religious beliefs. Indeed if there is a god of some sorts, then obviously he\she gave us minds for a reason.
In fact it was a man of the cloth, an actual Catholic priest who helped open the door to the Big Bang theory, with his work on the primordial atom.
Yet men like Pence are trapped within the confines of strict, totalitarian dogmatism. It stems from their authoritarianism.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:17 pmYou know what I’ve observed, Timmeh? You guys are the ones who refuse to consider ALL the science. in short, you guys (and by “you guys” I mean those on teh Right with whom I’ve discussed this) only consider the evidence that you think undermines the position that the globe is warming and that human activities contribute to it.
The evidence that supports it, you ignore.
That’s been my experience, anyway.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:17 pmRepublican science
1. deny it and use religion when it could get votes
May 5th, 2009 at 7:18 pm2. believe in it if you can make a huge profit
3. deny it if it doesn’t give you answers you want to hear
4. surely believe it if it can save your ass (medicine) or keep you hard (viagra).
Pence: I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In… Evolution
Then don’t ever take a medicine derived from genetic research.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:18 pmKMAMF – this took me a while but I love it. Can I borrow it PissedOffVeteran?
May 5th, 2009 at 7:19 pmTim Vaculik
Read this Global warming
and
Climate change denial
May 5th, 2009 at 7:19 pmWaynebro, Good point about doctors who were willing to sell their integrity and say that cigarettes were not harmful. So sientists who certainly know better.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:19 pmRight. It’s shorthand for “those who believe the evidence points to human impact on a warming climate”. The problem, Timmeh, is you use the name of a politician to stand for an entire science-based school of thought, and you imply that this science-based evidence should be dismissed because it is “claimed” by a politician.
It’s totally dishonest shorthand, is what it is.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:20 pmI do consider all the science. All the science points too:
1. The level of atmospheric CO2 has risen in direct proportion to measured human emissions.
2. Those same levels are the highest in, at least, 150,000 years.
3. In the period that increases in CO2 have been measured average global temperature has also risen in direct proportion to the level of CO2.
4. The ten warmest years on record all fell within a 12 year period from 1997-2008.
Those are the big ones and none of them are in dispute. And it’s doubly alarming when one considers this occurred during a period of decreased solar activity.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:21 pmTim learn something about Global Warming here.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:22 pmWe do consider all the information as best as the average non scientist can. And the fact that the entire scientific community except for a handful in THIS country, who’s findings are clearly swayed by politics.
Head over to Europe one time Charlemene.
You’ll find that they’re not having this debate.
The only “debate” is a tiny handful of people in this country who have decided that for some reason, God doesn’t want you to care for the planet.
But if you think CO2 emissions aren’t harmful, then go outside and start your car and suck on the tail pipe.
Let me know how that works out for you.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:22 pmHere’s one of the members of the Scientific Advisory board for your site VapidTim:
May 5th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Facts: The Republicans Arch Nemesis.
We don’t need no “stinkin” facts.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:24 pmWaynebro at #49
May 5th, 2009 at 7:24 pmI agree that there are a number of republicans who would check Box B. To their shame. Their electorate would check the same box. Shame on them too.
Thanks Marie. Those “scientists” Tim is heralding are propped up by neoconservative think tanks propped up by big oil.
There is no debate in Europe, because as usual, they’re ahead of us on the intellectual circuit.
Of course they’ve been around longer, so at least we have an excuse.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:25 pmAs I’ve said before, ALL the global warming deniers have an obvious political/financial stake.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:26 pmThanks for the graph, Pete
May 5th, 2009 at 7:27 pmToo many people confuse weather with climate. They ignore that extremes of weather are indications of climate change.
Funny. This guy is talking on a TV show which was invented using science and probably sent a couple e-mails today all made possible by science. He’ll probably hop in his car created by science to go home. While in the car, he’ll call his wife from a cell phone created by science. While at home he’ll surely interact with many things created by science. The food that he probably eats for dinner was genetically engineered to yield 20% more than usual farming practices could produce all thanks to SCIENCE.
But the dolt can’t ADMIT that science disproved creationism and intelligent design! AHHHHHH! Hypocrite!
May 5th, 2009 at 7:28 pmWell the electorate can do it. They can believe whatever nonsense they want. It’s a right of liberty.
But I don’t want someone LEADING people in an official capacity bringing that sort of nonsense into government.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:29 pmStem cell research is fine if it is done by private industry, funded by private investors — not taxpayers. Using taxpayer money to give to companies for stem cell research is flat wrong.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:30 pmThe federal government has no business using taxpayer money to “give” to lord knows who to research stem cells or anything else for that matter. How hard to you have to lobby your local crooked congressman to get some of this taxpayer money?
I would like a follow-up after the non-answer: Have you ever taken antibiotics? Do you see a doctor when you’re sick? Do your kids see a doctor?
They are anti-science. Their answer to science is always religious.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:30 pmAs Pete said, any scientist denying global warming is motivated by financial or political reasons.
Look at it this way. Astronauts represent some of the best and brightest this nation has to offer, right?
We all know that astronauts are highly educated, highly intelligent and well versed in science.
There are many astronauts who believe in God.
But there are no astronauts who deny global warming.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:32 pmkwsventures:
That has to be one of the most glaringly ignorant statements I’ve ever read.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:33 pmOT… thought this interesting… (found 20 min. ago)
Chrysler won’t repay bailout money
May 5th, 2009 at 7:33 pmCNNMoney.com – ?32 minutes ago?
An administration official confirms that a $4 billion bridge loan and $3.2 billion in bankruptcy financing won’t be paid back by Chrysler following bankruptcy.
Chrysler Dissidents Must Reveal Identity, Judge Says Bloomberg
Chrysler Delays Incentives; CEO Seeks Quick Bankruptcy Exit Wall Street Journal
Reuters – Detroit Free Press – MarketWatch – The Associated Press
all 1,993 news articles »
http://news.google.com/news?pz=1&ncl=1345806188&topic=b
You’re welcome, Marie.
As complex as global climate is, the implications of the data are quite simple.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:35 pmpete,
Sorry, but once again you have your facts wrong. All the ice core studies show increases in average global temperature PRECEDE the increase in CO2 levels! It’s not the other way around.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:35 pmI agree with kwsnetures.
We should not waste tax payer dollars on research. Surely those aliens are planning to crash in New Mexico again some time soon.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:37 pmTim,
We already know how stupid you are. You don’t need to keep proving it.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:38 pmBack to the side topic of requiring tests of candidates:
It would be a step in the right direction but, the real problem is that we have allowed our passion for free-speech to devolve into accepting that which is patently wrong. Some contrary opinions should be shouted down.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:38 pmWe do not mock other’s beliefs here at Think Progress. Some may think that the earth is only 6,000 years old and we must respect their belief, even if we think they have no evidence to back it up with.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:39 pmhttp://www.NASA.gov
May 5th, 2009 at 7:39 pmNo, Timmeh, some ice cores have shown increased CO2 levels preceding temperature rises. Also, there’s never been a constant CO2 source like human emissions.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:43 pmIn a post above, Bob asks the anti-science crowd about antibiotics.
It is elementary biology – evolution is in abundant evidence.
People who don’t believe in science have watched their children die for lack of medical care due to their religious prohibition, and total dependence on faith.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:44 pmI feel more pity than anger at such people – they are blinded by religion.
Politicians who campaign on anti-science are the ones who make me angry – they are willfully ignorant. And worse, they validate their ignorant constituents, and want to keep more people in ignorance. Guess they are afraid of too many smart people – they’d be exposed.
Thanks for reminding me, WAYNEBRO. The systematic destruction of the Earth’s ability to deal with CO2, like forests and even plains, is a VERY important consideration.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:46 pmPence is like Republicans:
May 5th, 2009 at 7:46 pmContemptuous of those who seek to understand them
Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
Authoritarian
Secretive
Paranoid
Seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
Conventional appearance
Goal of converting of their victims to theology.
“I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution”
Pence obviously doesn’t believe in common sense either…
…how the hell to superstitious morons like this get elected?
Are their districts filled with idiots like Daryll?
May 5th, 2009 at 7:49 pmFunny. The Raygun family flipped on the embryonic stem cell research issue. But, only after having to deal with a family member going crazy not remembering who they are anymore. “Don’t throw those sacred embryos away now become the rich people need them now!”
May 5th, 2009 at 7:49 pmFundies like Mike Pence merely regurgitate what they’ve been TOLD and are largely incapable of independent thought. Not that they’re not smart enough to think independently, it’s as though the prospect of doing so would denigrate their religious belief system (even though it does not, of necessity, have to do so). Poor Mike’s old enough now to have become fossilized in this way of “thinking,” so he’s a lost cause — no hope for him now. Better just move on.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:49 pmThere have been periods in history where the best minds have been ignored. We call them “Dark Ages”.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:53 pmI like where Chris Mathews stands on the issues, but think he often gets emotional/too excited and does not make his point as well as he could; however, I think he hit the nail on the head on this one.
Kudos Chris for asking pertinent questions.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:54 pmSpamming and name-jacking from the same troll? Sad. Very sad.
May 5th, 2009 at 7:55 pmpete Says:
Not to mention blackmail, pete. Isn’t that a felony?
May 5th, 2009 at 7:59 pmpete Says:
Even worse, blackmailing while doing it. It’s sad when people have to cry out for attention this way. Truly, truly sad.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:00 pmThe issue is not whether the federal government should fund one type of stem cell research or another. The issue is whether the federal government should fund stem cell research at all. Clearly there is no constitutional authority for Congress to do so, which means individual states and private citizens should decide whether to permit, ban, or fund it. Neither party in Washington can fathom that millions and millions of Americans simply don’t want their tax dollars spent on government research of any kind. This viewpoint is never considered.
Federal funding of medical research guarantees the politicization of decisions about what types of research for what diseases will be funded. Scarce tax resources are allocated according to who has the most effective lobby, rather than on the basis of need or even likely success. Federal funding also causes researchers to neglect potential treatments and cures that do not qualify for federal funds. Medical advancements often result from radical ideas and approaches that are scoffed at initially by the establishment. When scientists become dependent on government funds, however, they quickly learn not to rock the boat and stick to accepted areas of inquiry. Federal funds thus distort the natural market for scientific research.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:02 pmIs it a constitutional pre-requisite to being a member of the federal government, that you must have been a lawyer? So you would speak in a way that would prevent sound bites?
These sheisty old farts are all so slippery and silver tongued. JUST ANSWER THE F-ING QUESTION THAT HE ASKED YOU!!!!!
A. “Did that speed limit sign say fifty five?”
B. “What an excellent question to ask. Well, the philosophy of the subject depends on what you exactly mean by ’sign.’ Furthermore, your speedometer reading may be off by up to three miles per hour depending on a number of circumstances. So, it would cost us jobs to enforce the limit by the penal burden put on poor families and children.”
I mean, am I that far off? Maybe people watch fox because it’s like Xtreem Reality Politics! No attention span required.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:03 pmkwsventures, you ignorant troll. Do a little research on how diseases like smallpox, polio, and even plague have been combated. Then look into penicillin and the other “wonder drugs”. Many, if not most, of the medical breakthroughs of the last 75 years have been financed with government funds.
Seriously. If you are going to post? Try learning something first.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:07 pmKind of like on “Idiocracy”?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
kwsventures,
You are correct:
This is especially true for CLIMATE research!
May 5th, 2009 at 8:08 pmYes. I believe that blackmail is a felony.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:09 pmkwsventures,
I forget her name, but a pretty famous scientist recently came out with the truth of how scientists who do not agree with the “politically correct” version of the “global warming” theme MUST keep quiet or risk losing their funding, or worse – their reputations.
So much for science!
May 5th, 2009 at 8:10 pmYea you’re right Tim.
What do the guys at Nasa know?
Other than how to walk on the Moon, travel beyond the solar system…..comprehend “Space\Time” and photograph the dawn of creation…..
:|
I mean …other than that junk…what the hell do they know?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:10 pmWAYNEBRO,
And who pays NASA employee’s paychecks?
You got it – the GOVERNMENT.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:12 pmTim Vaculik Says:
kwsventures,
You are correct:
When scientists become dependent on government funds, however, they quickly learn not to rock the boat and stick to accepted areas of inquiry. Federal funds thus distort the natural market for scientific research.
This is especially true for CLIMATE research!
So then. Why did the Bush White House systematically attempt to censor it’s own appointed scientists when they came to the conclusion that CO2 emissions constitute a crisis?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:12 pmHey, you think Mike Pence knows about Red Shift?
:|
He must right, to be so much smarter than those chuckleheads over at NASA?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:13 pmNope, the government dont create jobs. =D
May 5th, 2009 at 8:13 pmI don’t get the part where science is a “belief”, as in you do or don’t believe in climate change, or you do or don’t believe in evolution. Science is not a belief system. You take the best evidence you have, apply things you know to be true, and derive conclusions based on the evidence. If your conclusion proves to be wrong, you develop a new hypothesis. It’s not a system where you can dismiss evidence because you don’t believe in the conclusion.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:13 pmI also would think that it would be difficult to defend the natural cycle theory when you realize we’ve released a million+ years of stored carbon into the atmosphere in the last 150 years. If the storage/release of carbon is a natural cycle it was meant to have a longer period.
For those who oppose government financing of science, they should consider that when taxpayers pay for the science, taxpayers can own the results. When private corporations pay for the research (often based on government-funded research), they own the results. And if they happen to discover a way to manufacture a life-saving medicine, they could deny you that medicine if you were unable to pay the price they wanted to charge for it. That is one reason why I do not believe that health care should be driven by capitalism. Not when lives are at stake.
Some things in life, life good health, should be more important than money. If money is what motivates you, then you are not interested in the Common Good.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:14 pmYou’ve got nothing. If you knew anything you’d have put it up here already. Obviously you have no scruples making baseless attacks and namejacking.
KMAMF
May 5th, 2009 at 8:14 pmI will read and evaluate what any scientist has to say about global climate, but I don’t give particular credence to NASA scientists.
I believe you have to do a LOT of reading to get a grasp on the myriad issues involved in global climate.
What I won’t accept is political posturing and outright deception. I just think that man-made “global warming” as it is being pushed upon us is an outright HOAX!
May 5th, 2009 at 8:16 pmSo that means we didn’t walk on the moon?
They didn’t send an orbiter to mars?
They haven’t traveled beyond our solar system?
All those things never happened?
Not to mention your “theory” breaks down as soon as you realize that it was LAST YEAR, when BUSH and the REPUBLICANS who did NOT accept global warming were in control, when NASA came out with this data.
:|
Any other “theories” you’d like me to shoot holes in?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:16 pmI want my tax money going to stem cell research. And I bet I pay in a lot more than you. I don’t want my tax money to go to soldiers in Afghanistan who are proselytizing and passing out bibles to Muslims creating more enemies every day.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:17 pmYea because we all know they know nothing.
They just traveled into outer space, visited alien worlds, solved thousands of scientific problems and questions in thousands of experiments in space, etc.
What the hell would they know?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:18 pmYou’re right, Timmeh. NASA is a government entity. And the Bush White House censored their conclusions for political expediency.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:19 pmYou don’t accept what you are doing?
Because that’s all you and your group of throwbacks are doing.
It’s not just NASA dimwit.
It’s the entire GLOBAL scientific community and the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY have confirmed what you and the pre-schooled idiots like you are trying to sell.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:20 pmThere exist NO MODELS that can predict what will happen with global average temperatures.
The models being used by global warming alarmists are crude, inaccurate and worse than useless. None of them give accurate results when fed historical data!
So how is it then that people claim that the science is “settled” with respect to cause and effect in our climate? The answer is obvious: the science IS NOT “settled” and the only consensus that exists is that of like-minded fools and politicians!
May 5th, 2009 at 8:20 pmhttp://www.NASA.gov
May 5th, 2009 at 8:21 pmhttp://www.NASA.gov
May 5th, 2009 at 8:23 pmI am very gratified to see Congressional Democrats OPPOSING the ill-advised “cap and tax” scheme being pushed by President Obama and his surrogates!
Thank God someone has grown a pair.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:24 pmWAYNEBRO,
at #146.
So? Do you know that that there have been periods in the not too distant past that had HIGHER average global temperatures? You need to take a longer view.
The Earth’s climate has natural variations.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:25 pmBut hey, like the genius Tim said, what the hell does NASA know?
They’re just the ONLY people in human history to have visited an alien world.
:|
Bunch of rubes I bet.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:25 pmTim Vaculik Says:
There exist NO MODELS that can predict what will happen with global average temperatures.
The models being used by global warming alarmists are crude, inaccurate and worse than useless. None of them give accurate results when fed historical data!
Is this your scientific opinion, or do you have a link?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:26 pmI know that Reichwhiners hate Wikipedia. However, this entry is very well written and the sources are numerous. Here’s an excerpt:
With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change.[68]
Despite this, statements by individual scientists opposing the mainstream assessment of global warming do include claims that the observed warming is likely to be attributable to natural causes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
May 5th, 2009 at 8:28 pmI don’t argue that the Earth does not experience variations in average temperature.
What I contend is that the notion that catastrophic warming is underway and that it is caused by mankind’s activities is just NOT supported by the facts or even a plausible theory.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:28 pmSure Tim, it’s much wiser to have the energy companies pay for scientific research. I’m sure they don’t expect their “researchers” to follow the party line. Idiot.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:28 pmWhile our climate simulations are imperfect, I feel that if one does not understand a complex system, it’s best not to F*** with it. We’ve been f’ing with our climate for some time. Since we can neither understand it, nor model it adequately, low impact upon it is our most prudent course of action.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:28 pmDoodle,
You missed my earlier post re: scientists. Please don’t repeat the tired old argument (and an invalid one as well) about oil company funding of scientists.
Please go to http://www.co2science.org/ and educate yourself!
May 5th, 2009 at 8:30 pmYes.
When molten lava covered the earth for example.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:30 pmIf someone doesn’t believe in evolution, does that mean that they don’t want varied antibiotics to combat the mutated or evolved strains of diseases?
Does that means that he wouldn’t want the new anti-virals to fight some new swine or avian flu??
May 5th, 2009 at 8:30 pmIf one scientist could test one of the theories of global warming and find it false the scientific community would have to admit they were wrong. That hasn’t happened except where faux scientist have been paid to lie and their tests haven’t proven to be accurate.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:31 pmWe don’t need models, Timmeh. Atmospheric CO2 is at a high and so are temperatures. In fact, 10 of the warmest years actually measured have occurred in the last 12 years while CO2 is at it’s highest level in, at least, 150,000 years.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:32 pmWAYNEBRO,
O.K., this is the last time I’m going to waste my breath on this topic you keep pushing:
Your assertion is simply untrue on its face. I don’t know any other way to put it. You are wrong even if you insist on repeating falsehoods!
May 5th, 2009 at 8:35 pmThat’s because you are a moron.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:35 pmTim, you give a new meaning to the word “moron”.
We’ve all been to the website you’re posting. It’s run by the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.
And the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change is an right wing anti-global warming group funded by “EXXON MOBILE”.
And last I checked moron, Exxon Mobile qualifies as “Big Oil”.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:36 pmAnother lie, Timmeh? The theory of the greenhouse effect dates back to 1824 and has been confirmed by experimentation since that time. Not to mention all the data that shows temps and CO2 going up together.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:37 pmHow can an idiotic teabagger be against stem cell RESEARCH?
I can see where an idiotic teabagger can’t comprehend a long period of time like two minutes (the time it takes a repug to change his/her idiotic stance to another idiotic stance.)
But stem cell research? How can they make such idiotic groups without thinking of playing, “How Does That Sound” in their mind?
There is viable research in YOUR lifetime, teabagger about proven Stem Cell Research. You guys like being dumb and making a mockery out of intelligence.
teabag parties and pizza parties…did turd go to the pizza party?
the club of parties = teabaggers
May 5th, 2009 at 8:37 pmpete,
Sorry, my friend. Correlation does not equal causation as anyone who has studied statistics knows.
For example. There have been periods in Earth’s history when the average temperatures were HIGHER than they are now, but CO2 levels were LOWER.
Please do yourself a favor and read a little will you? One excellent book is Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, Updated and Expanded Edition available at http://www.amazon.com
This is an amazing book, well documented and referenced as well.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:38 pmI went to your site and even copied one of the biographies or your alleged “experts”. You have ignored everybody who gave you substantial documentation while you link to one site funded by energy companies where the scientists are in unrelated fields.
Besides nobody cares what you think or what you want. Keep up our get out of the way because idiots like you have wasted 8 years with your stupidity and your dunce of a president.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:39 pmTake your book and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine. You wouldn’t have a clue if a book was well documents and referenced. Look at the idiot site you already linked to. You are absolutely clueless people like you are the reason the rest of the developed world laughs at us.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:42 pmTim Vaculik
No Tim there ISNT a vast body of peer reviewed science that WE have to ignore there is a vast body of peer reviewed science and the clear scientific body of evidence YOU have to ignore. Thats easy for you since you are a brainwashed moron. This isnt Al Gore sounding the alarm all alone. This is YOU being led around by the nose as usual by the screechmonkeys that do your thinking for you. You are just sad and pathetic
May 5th, 2009 at 8:43 pmWAYNEBRO,
Here’s info from the web site:
They are a 501(c)3 non-profit. Anyone is free to contribute. If you would actually take the time to READ the research they cite you would learn that they DISSEMINATE information, not CREATE it at the behest of anyone!
Ever heard of balance?
May 5th, 2009 at 8:44 pmdoodle,
Your noodle is screwed on wrong. Sorry you can’t even be honest in a fair debate. Too bad.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:45 pmI have present only a FRACTION of the information and resources to obtain unbiased information about the science of our global climate.
Rest assured, there’s a lot more out there. Too bad I’m talking to a herd of OSTRICHES.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:48 pmOh, come on, Timmeh. The author of your suggested book, Fred Singer, has an agenda.
Singer has been a consultant to various major corporations, including GE, Ford, GM, Exxon, Shell, Sun Oil, Lockheed Martin and IBM.[15][16] In the 1990s Singer worked together with a number of industries whose interests matched his views on controversial issues, notably on global warming and on the effects of tobacco smoke and ozone on human health.
He’s a shill, pure and simple.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:48 pmLook, guys like Tim aren’t going to believe the reality of global warming, until we have another indice of destruction, like a steadily growing rise in the atmosphere’s methane content, not attributable to other factors. When the temperature reaches a certain level, the oceans will begin releasing their stored methane, and then watch the fun. Most people will develop COPD after a certain amount of exposure to these increased methane levels, and we can expect lung-related deaths to skyrocket. At that point, the Tims will be in the same boat, and it will be interesting to watch them try to explain away their own sudden contraction of eventually-fatal lung diseases, and to see if they hold to their convictions as they are gasping out their last breaths on an oxygen generator.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:48 pmTimmeh you are an idiot. You are stupid, brainwashed and worthless. Your baseless assertions and reruns of what Rush told you to believe serve no purpose other than to AGAIN show what a fool you are.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:49 pm:|
Idiot. Most organizations that accept donations are “non profit”.
You said they weren’t funded by big oil.
You said that was a lie.
But IRS records as well as EXXONS OWN Corporate giving sheet posted on their website shows that they have been funded by EXXON to the tune of over ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS to kick out these “reports”, which EXXON uses to deny global warming.
You lied.
You got caught.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:50 pmNO Timmeh you are talking to people with functional cerebral cortexes. You are too stupid to be taken seriously. You are a moron and you are brainwashed. We already KNOW where the science is on this. We KNOW what the vast majority of climate scientists and virtually ALL peer reviewed studies say and we dont CARE what Rush told you to think. Rush is a liar and YOU are a fool
May 5th, 2009 at 8:51 pmHere Tim, I’ll make it easy for you.
I’ll list the organizations propped up by the right wing and funded by EXXON MOBILE to deny global warming, and you find me ONE scientist, NOT on the list.
That’s easy, right?
Just provide me ONE scientist who denies global warming, who’s not affiliated with the right wing and who’s NOT affiliated with the organizations on this list.
Should be easy if I was “lying” like you claimed.
—
Accuracy in Academia
Accuracy in Media
Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty
Africa Fighting Malaria
Air Quality Standards Coalition
ALEC – American Legislative Exchange Council
Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
Alliance for Climate Strategies
American Coal Foundation
American Conservative Union Foundation
American Council for Capital Formation Center for Policy Research
American Council on Science and Health
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
American Enterprise Institute-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies
American Friends of the Institute for Economic Affairs
American Petroleum Institute
American Policy Center
American Recreation Coalition
American Spectator Foundation
Americans for Tax Reform
Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy
Arizona State University Office of Cimatology
Aspen Institute
Association of Concerned Taxpayers
Atlantic Legal Foundation
Atlas Economic Research Foundation
Blue Ribbon Coalition
Capital Legal Foundation
Capital Research Center and Greenwatch
Cato Institute
Center for American and International Law
Center for Environmental Education Research
Center for Security Policy
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise
Center for the New West
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
Centre for the New Europe
CFACT – Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow
Chemical Education Foundation
Citizens for A Sound Economy and CSE Educational Foundation
Citizens for the Environment and CFE Action Fund
Clean Water Industry Coalition
Climate Research Journal
Communications Institute
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Congress of Racial Equality
Consumer Alert
Cooler Heads Coalition
Council for Solid Waste Solutions
DCI Group
Defenders of Property Rights
Earthwatch Institute
ECO or Environmental Conservation Organization
European Enterprise Institute
ExxonMobil Corporation
Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies
Fraser Institute
FREE – Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment
Free Enterprise Action Institute
Free Enterprise Education Institute
Frontiers of Freedom Institute and Foundation
George C. Marshall Institute
George Mason University, Law and Economics Center
Global Climate Coalition
Great Plains Legal Foundation
Greening Earth Society
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Heartland Institute
Heritage Foundation
Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, Stanford University
Hudson Institute
Illinois Policy Institute
Independent Commission on Environmental Education
Independent Institute
Institute for Biospheric Research
Institute for Energy Research
Institute for Regulatory Science
Institute for Senior Studies
Institute for the Study of Earth and Man
Institute of Humane Studies, George Mason University
Interfaith Stewardship Alliance
International Climate Science Coalition
International Council for Capital Formation
International Policy Network – North America
International Republican Institute
James Madison Institute
Junkscience.com
Landmark Legal Foundation
Lexington Institute
Lindenwood University
Mackinac Center
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
Media Institute
Media Research Center
Mercatus Center, George Mason University
Mountain States Legal Foundation
National Association of Neighborhoods
National Black Chamber of Commerce
National Center for Policy Analysis
National Center for Public Policy Research
National Council for Environmental Balance
National Environmental Policy Institute
National Legal Center for the Public Interest
National Mining Association
National Policy Forum
National Wetlands Coalition
National Wilderness Institute
New England Legal Foundation
New Zealand Climate Science Coalition
Pacific Legal Foundation
Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy
Peabody Energy
PERC – Property and Environment Research Center, formerly Political Economy Research Center
Public Interest Watch
Reason Foundation
Reason Public Policy Institute
Science and Environmental Policy Project
Seniors Coalition
Shook, Hardy and Bacon LLP
Small Business Survival Committee
Southeastern Legal Foundation
Stanford University GCEP
Statistical Assessment Service (STATS)
Tech Central Science Foundation or Tech Central Station
Texas Public Policy Foundation
The Advancement of Sound Science Center, Inc.
The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition
The Justice Foundation (formerly Texas Justice Foundation)
The Locke Institute
United for Jobs
University of Oklahoma Foundation, Inc.
US Russia Business Council
Virginia Institute for Public Policy
Washington Legal Foundation
Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government, and Public Policy
Western Fuels
World Affairs Councils of America
World Climate Report
—
Now, “TIM”, show me a scientist NOT affiliated with one of these groups who denies global warming.
Come on.
Just one.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:52 pmDo you know what non-profit means? All those NASA scientist work for a not-for-profit too. What is your point. All you group does is take money in from the energy companies and spew the propaganda that they want put forth. The “scientific advisors” could each be paid $10M a year and as long as the organization has no money left it’s non-profit. The propagandists or as you call them “scientist” can make all the money they want. God you’re stupid.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:53 pmYou know who I think are the most trustworthy scientists? The grad students who pay for the privilege of spending months in primitive conditions in order to collect data for the tenured researchers who will take credit for their hard work.
The fact is that most research, the hard work part, is done by people who make sacrifices to produce the data. They are not collecting “government checks”.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:54 pmThen again, so is Tim. I’m sure somebody is paying him enough that he doesn’t mind soundling like an idiot.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:55 pmEveryone of those “organizations” denies global warming.
And everyone of them is made of of neoconservatives.
And everyone of them is funded by EXXON MOBILE.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:56 pmFind me a “scientist” Tim, who does not believe in Global Warming, that’s not affiliated with one of the organizations on that list.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:57 pmOh and “Tim”?
That organization you were shilling for, and trying to claim wasn’t associated with “Big Oil”, has received $100,000 dollars in perpetual funding from EXXON MOBILE since 1998.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:59 pmAnd that’s just from “EXXON”.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:00 pmOops! I should have also mentioned the undergrad students who live in squalor in order to collect data that the grad students will submit in order to curry favor with their tenured professors.
Seriously. The Reichwing claim that scientists are riding a “librul gravy train” is laughable.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:01 pmbarfly,
AGAIN, please get your facts straight. The rise in methane has LEVELED OFF and the rate of increase is now actually NEGATIVE.
Try a little harder, but at least use facts.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:03 pmShow me a scientist who denies global warming, and I’ll show you a scientist affiliated with Big Oil.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:03 pmNo, Tim is actually partly correct. Fluid dynamics yield highly unpredictable results. We dont know if it will rain 3 days from now.
However, we do know where it is likely to rain the most 3 days from now. And we know when that changes it’s scary. It could mean bad things are happening.
This still does not lend creedence to the arguement that we should just burn everything we can find for energy because it’s cheap.
Equal causation is irrelevant poop, we all know, and you dont have to bring it up. When your boat is sinking, you don’t sit around and argue about how the water and the hole are related. Which seems to be going on a lot right now.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:04 pmWAYNEBRO,
Your pretty good at setting up straw men, but not so clever on debating I’m afraid.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:05 pmThe Methane levels rise each time you come in.
Now, I’m still waiting.
Show me a scientist who is NOT affiliated with Big Oil.
You pointed to me to one site, and got caught lying.
Wanna try again?
May 5th, 2009 at 9:06 pmHow many people believe that timmy is getting his synopsis from Amazon’s review section?
he’s all fake as usual.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:09 pmStraw men? You’re the one who said this;
Well, I did “educate” myself.
And I educated you too, when I showed that this group WAS funded by big oil.
So its you who created the straw man.
I just exposed it.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:09 pmSo Tim, who pays you to act so stupid? I assume it’s an act because you know how to use a computer.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:09 pmNow, you’re back pedaling, try to divert from your shame at being caught openly lying.
And you’ve yet to answer my challenge to produce one single scientist not affiliated with big oil, who denies global warming.
:|
I’m waiting.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:10 pmGot a link, Timmeh? Here’s what a cursory search came up with:
Although less dramatic than release from clathrates, but already happening, is an increase in the release of methane from bogs as permafrost melts. Although records of permafrost are limited, recent years (1999 to 2007) have seen record thawing of permafrost in Alaska and Siberia.
Recent measurements in Siberia show that the methane released is five times greater than previously estimated.
And? Once again Wiki has footnotes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane
May 5th, 2009 at 9:10 pmWhat I find most fascinating in posting on this blog is that I have to argue the obvious to people who seem otherwise intelligent!
I’m not talking about the MERITS of any particular idea, but rather just the mechanics of taking a position and arguing from it. What is it about debating opposing theories that rattles you folks so badly?
I think I know, but I’d rather hear it from someone here honest enough to admit it.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:12 pmDoodlebug Shayne Says:
So Tim, who pays you to act so stupid? I assume it’s an act because you know how to use a computer.
Didn’t you hear? Government scientists, in an effort to get rich by destroying modern civilization, created and implanted a “computer gene” in stupid people.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:13 pmpete,
here: http://www.co2science.org/articles/V11/N42/C1.php
and here:
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V11/N49/C1.php
May 5th, 2009 at 9:14 pmThe theory is in fact fairly simple, Timmeh:
Carbon dioxide is known to be a greenhouse gas.
Human activity is known to add carbon dioxide to the Earth’s atmosphere.
The actual dynamics are far more complex than this, but the basic equation cannot be dismissed: human activity contributes to climate change.
This theory is at the very least plausible. So your rather hyperbolic claim that catastrophic warming is underway and that it is caused by mankind’s activities is just NOT supported by… a plausible theory is plain ridiculous.
Simply put.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:15 pmpete,
And especially HERE:
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V10/N11/C1.php
May 5th, 2009 at 9:16 pmWhat I have cited are excellent articles on the subject of methane concentrations in the atmosphere.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:16 pmI think in order for your argument to be taken seriously, you’re going to first have to describe what it means to be “rattled” and to give some examples.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:17 pmI’ll take a stab at it, Timmeh.
We’re tired of people who don’t know what they’re talking about wasting our time with arguments that are not supported by evidence. There comes a time when dissenting views are just plain wrong and it’s time to move on.
We humans should not be arguing about the causes of global warming. We should be exploring ways to rethink what we burn, how much we burn, and why we burn it.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:19 pmralph,
CO2 is just not the villian it’s made out to be. First of all, the concentration of this gas in the atmosphere is extremely small compared to other greenhouse gases!
The focus on CO2 is not misguided. It is actually INTENTIONAL because he who gains control of CO@ gains control of economic activity. It’s no accident that CO2 has been blamed for global warming. The science simply does not support this with any degree of reasonable certainty!
May 5th, 2009 at 9:20 pmWhat is your degree in and where did you go to school Tim since you seem to believe you know more about science than the rest of us.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:21 pmMy degree is in environmental biology and I don’t claim to have the expertise you do. In short, I know what I don’t know. You have the certainty of a fool. Or somebody who gets paid to act like one.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:22 pmralph,
C’mon! Look at your fellow posters!
May 5th, 2009 at 9:22 pmTim Vaculik Says:
WAYNEBRO,
Your pretty good at setting up straw men, but not so clever on debating I’m afraid.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
He is mopping the floor with you moron. You are just to stupid to know it, pretty much like you are too stupid to know ANYTHING other than what it was that Rush told you to think. You are truly pathetic
May 5th, 2009 at 9:25 pmWhat is it that rattles you so badly?
Besides being caught lying?
You’re no scientist. You’re an idiot shill for the right wing, trying to get a bunch of non scientists to argue with you, a non scientist about science in which the jury is already in in the scientific community.
There’s no debate out there. The only debate is coming from pseudo scientists who whore themselves out to big oil.
You claimed that your “think tank” Co2 website was not affiliated with Big Oil.
You were wrong.
And now you’re still quoting it.
Even the “scientists” on your site, are a joke.
They’re not actually “climatologists”. I checked. The first “scientist” on the list “Donald G Baker” holds his degree in AGRICULTURE.
And he’s part of the IEE, a neocon think tank fully funded by Big Oil.
IEE is funded by EXXON MOBILE, SHELL OIL, Schlumberger Oilfield Services, Nippon Oil Exploration USA Limited, Statoil Exploration , Pennzoil Company, ENRON, Duke Energy Corporation, Halliburton Energy Services, Southern Company Energy, just to name a few.
Your so called independent scientists are anything but.
But feel free to produce one.
I’m still waiting.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:27 pmdoodle,
NOW your noodle is working again.
Look, I am not trying to say I know more, I am just trying to look at all the information I possibly can and I try to get others to do the same.
Please don’t confuse the tone of my posts with that of an ignorant or arrogant person, for I can assure you I am neither.
I have an MBA, but also have a background in the technical sciences.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:27 pmWAYNE,
Now it’s YOUR noodle that’s been in the water a little too long. Geez
May 5th, 2009 at 9:28 pmIsn’t it obvious, Shayne? Timmeh got his degree from FAUX “News”, Drudge, or World Net Daily.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:28 pmpete,
A pretty revealing statement, my friend. When we cease being inquisitive and simply accept what we are told then we are lost.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:30 pmThat’s your answer?
May 5th, 2009 at 9:31 pmpete,
FYI I don’t watch FOX news, read the Drudge Report or log on to WND.
Don’t listen to Rush either.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:31 pmRegarding the competency test idea:
I think this could work, and based on the last presidential election, I would strongly recommend it for the presidency, but in order for it to work, we need real lobbyist and campaign finance reform.
Of course these two things would fix what is wrong with America, but would be necessary in the case of congressional competency exams, otherwise the corporation that received the no-bid, crony contract to produce the test, would also hold conferences to hand-feed the answers to only complicit politicians.
Nothing short of lobbyist and campaign finance reform will rebuild the middle class. We continue to see the bribery and perpetuation of damage to our nation daily.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:31 pmTimmeh you are a moron it really is that simple. Do you really think we have an obligation to take the same arguments we have already dealt with 50 times and treat them as if they had NEW validity because you spew them AGAIN? You are like the Classic Rock of tired old debunked talking points. You flat out lie telling us there are TONS of peer reviewed science that WE have to ignore when there is hardly ANY peer reviewed science on the side of the deniers. The VAST majority of peer reviewed science is WITH the clear scientific consensus. YOu are not going to be taken seriously because you are NOT serious and snivelling like the punk you are that we DONT take you seriously and treat you like you deserve respectful debate is just stupid. Put some food on our plates if you want to see reasoned discussion. Your tired propaganda is just boring
May 5th, 2009 at 9:32 pmWayne!
Get a grip. Go look at the research cited on the web site and where it comes from.
Focus on the science if you are able…
May 5th, 2009 at 9:32 pmTim V.
Your a LIAR and a RUBE.
STFU n KMAMF
May 5th, 2009 at 9:33 pmOnly if MBA stands for McDonald’s Burger Association.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:33 pmYou are so!
ur
May 5th, 2009 at 9:34 pmTim Vaculik Says:
pete,
FYI I don’t watch FOX news, read the Drudge Report or log on to WND.
Don’t listen to Rush either.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Sure Timmeh it is just a coincidence that you come in here day after day spewing his talking points.Perhaps you picked them up by telepathy from the ether.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:35 pmI did.
And it came from people not working as climatologists and funded by Big Oil.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:35 pmNo, you just hang out in left wing sites selling dogma from pseudo scientific right wing think tank sites sponsored by big oil.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:37 pmOne fact is undeniable.
When you hear anyone say there’s a scientific “consensus” or that the science is “settled” on the subject of our climate you KNOW you are listening to someone who either doesn’t really understand science at all or the person has an agenda!
You NEVER hear those who question the notion of catastrophic, man-made global warming speaking in those terms.
True scientists know that just because some of their number may agree with each other, a “consensus” is irrelevant.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:39 pmThat’s true, that the concentration is very small. But in a system that more or less self-regulates, a small increase in one element can have an outsized effect. The fact remains that human activity is increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Your claim that human impact on climate change is not supported by a plausible theory is bullshit.
Tim Vaculik Says:
ralph,
CO2 is just not the villian it’s made out to be. First of all, the concentration of this gas in the atmosphere is extremely small compared to other greenhouse gases!
Perhaps the science that you choose to accept does not support the theory of anthropogenic climate change, but there is plenty out there that does, and to, again, claim that “the science” does not support it is either dishonest or ignorant.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:39 pmWayne,
I tried. Like I said, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own set of facts.
Facts just get in your way.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:40 pmTim Vaculik Says:
pete says:
We humans should not be arguing about the causes of global warming
A pretty revealing statement, my friend. When we cease being inquisitive and simply accept what we are told then we are lost.
First off, I am definitely not your friend. Second, that’s what’s called a “quote mine”.
While your agenda makes it necessary to respond in that manner, even you aren’t stupid enough to misread my post. The best scientific minds our world has to offer need to be freed from defending their conclusions about why global warming is occurring and devote their energies to mitigating the damage.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:40 pmdishonest or ignorant.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:41 pmI am thinking both
No, Kay, you’re wrong. This is a free country, and we must respect the right of people to believe whatever they want, even, to paraphrase Richard Dawkins, in a holy teapaot circling Mars. But we are under absolutely no obligation to respect the beliefs themselves. I personally have no problem mocking someone’s belief that the world is 6,000 years old, or that global warming is some sort of vast left-wing conspiracy, or that Adam just popped up out of the earth. It’s absurd and should be dealt with as such.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:43 pmRalph,
I agree with you on one point. Sometimes small changes can have an outsized effect. There’s some interesting, current data out there that points to the effect the sun has on our climate.
Several articles and studies I’ve read lately point to a plausible theory that even small changes in the sun’s activity can have big effects on our climate.
I’m referring in part to the correlation between the sun’s activity during the last “little ice age.”
May 5th, 2009 at 9:44 pmThis is complete and utter bullshit. No one could “look at all the information” and make definitive statements like “It’s no accident that CO2 has been blamed for global warming. The science simply does not support this with any degree of reasonable certainty!”
Someone who truly sought the truth and still gave climate deniers credence would at least admit that there is some compelling evidence in favor of human impact on global warming. One need not be convinced by it, but it must be acknowledged.
You, Timmeh, refuse to even acknowledge it. That’s how I know you’re full of shit. You are just as certain, on the other side, as are those here that you criticize for not “looking at the science”.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:45 pmpete,
Don’t get snippy.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:46 pmralph,
Well, what evidence is there that I should give any credence to the notion that man is having an oversized influence on the climate?
May 5th, 2009 at 9:48 pmThen why do you dismiss the potential that increased CO2 — a known greenhouse gas — could be at least partly responsible for the warming trend we’ve seen over the past century?
You accept the concept of an “outsized effect” but you immediately focus on sun spots, a favorite scapegoat for the denier community, and you dismiss the impact that man-caused CO2 has been theorized to have.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:48 pmReally?
Yea NASA.
Those guys don’t understand science at all.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:50 pmralph,
Evidently you haven’t come across the story about the guy who first came up with the “greenhouse gas” theory.
There’s interesting history on this topic that I ought to go find and post here.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:50 pmIf you truly “looked at all the science” as you claim to do, I wouldn’t have to tell you. You would be aware of at least some of the multitude of studies that support this very conclusion.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:50 pmTim Vaculik Says:
Ralph,
I agree with you on one point. Sometimes small changes can have an outsized effect. There’s some interesting, current data out there that points to the effect the sun has on our climate.
Several articles and studies I’ve read lately point to a plausible theory that even small changes in the sun’s activity can have big effects on our climate.
I’m referring in part to the correlation between the sun’s activity during the last “little ice age.”
I already dealt with that tripe in my second post in this thread. While not as low as the “little ice age” the Sun’s output has been decreasing during the last 11 years and, according to some criteria, is at a 100 year low, a 50 year low, or a 55 year low. Temperatures have gone up while solar activity has gone down.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:50 pmOh, please do.
This ought to be fun.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:51 pmralph,
O.K., have you studied the actual concentrations of the gas and how much of it is naturally produced vs. that which mankinds activities are contributing?
May 5th, 2009 at 9:51 pmNo, the “facts” get in the way of uneducated twits like you.
Because you think “my opinion” has anything to do with it.
It’s not MY opinion, but the opinion of the MAJORITY of climatologists throughout the world.
I take “their” opinion, along with the opinion of the only scientists ever to place a human being on another planet, over yours any day.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:53 pmralph,
Here’s a small sample:
May 5th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
You haven’t.
Unless you’re talking about the concentrations of gas lodged in your bowels.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:54 pmPlease explain the importance of this tactic.
Seems to me, that if a river is flooding a town in a spring rainstorm, you don’t really have to know how much of the water (or which water molecules) are from the rainfall and which are from melting snowpack hundreds of miles away.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:57 pmAnd go ahead. Post the know nothing opinions of a bunch of Big Oil whores who are not even climatologists , but instead just a bunch of money grubbing morons who will say whatever Big Oil pays them to say.
Go ahead.
The world will move forward in spite of idiots like you. It always has.
A few decades from now history books will tell stories of morons like you who tried to stop the evolution of our energy technologies, and school kids everywhere, will laugh.
:|
Not that they’re not laughing at you now.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:58 pmPence is a jerk, but what he seems to be saying is that evolution is the means by which God created living things. Some reasonably sane people believe that.
Personally, I’m an atheist.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:58 pmNo, he’s relfusing to say that. He’s implying that it may be the case, but he insists that he doesn’t know the means by which God accomplished the task.
He wusses out, in other words. If he wanted to say that evolution is God’s method, then he could have easily said so. He didn’t.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:00 pmTimmeh, that’s a lot of words there, but one, you failed to include the link to your source (always a classy move) and two, it dealt with an increase in amplitude of a seasonal shift in atmospheric CO2.
Not really much there to support your thesis, son. It does attribute a significant amount of the amplitude increase to global warming, which i suppose you would insist means that CO2 increases follow warming, but in order to cling to that belief you would have to ignore the measurable industrial output of greenhouse gases in the civilized world over the past two hundred years. This output is not the result of warming; it is the result of human consumption of fossil fuels.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:05 pmTimmeh when you see someone trying to denigrate even the TERM scientific consensus. You KNOW you are dealing with a brainwashed moron who doesnt even know WHY he believes what he spews other than Rush TOLD him to believe it and he KNOWS the science and the scientists arent on his side. In fact you KNOW it is someone way too stupid to even USE the term science. So you have embarassed yourself AGAIN Timmeh. We already KNEW what Rush told you to think about this subject and the only thing you have done is once again show how utterly ignorant you are.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:05 pmMore interesting stuff for you science hounds:
excerpted from http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/summaries/co2climatehistory.php
May 5th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Tim Vaculik Says:
ralph,
Here’s a small sample:
A sample of what? Unattributed, unsupported conclusions derived from who knows what data and written by folk unnamed?
May 5th, 2009 at 10:07 pmWhat Pence said was that he believed that god created heaven and earth etc., but sorta acknowledged that evolution may have been the means by which god did it. However, when pressed with the question (paraphrasing) ‘do you believe that god created heaven and earth in 6 days’, Pence wiggled around and refused to answer.
Obviously, Pence didn’t want to a) dismiss evolution outright, and b) admit that he believes everything in the bible is fact. Wuss!
May 5th, 2009 at 10:10 pmTimmeh, you realize, don’t you, that your go-to source for info has an agenda, right?
I thought that was a no-no for you?
Do you ever cite information from a source that supports the theory of anthropogenic climate change?
May 5th, 2009 at 10:10 pmNice to see the Flat Earthers are still going strong ;)
May 5th, 2009 at 10:10 pmSorry, ralph, great minds, etc.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:12 pmWell, as always it’s been fun.
Like I said earlier, I think I know why some of you seem so uncomfortable with the idea of debating topics such as this.
One factor is the well-known phenomena of the “true believer”. The true believer has already made up their mind and stubbornly refuses to consider even the possibility that what they believe in may not be so. They seek out only those things that re-inforce their beliefs and vehemently denounce those that do not.
Try to keep an open mind folks. This is what I try to do at all times. I am open to changing my opinions.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:15 pmOur Timmeh Troll is a known PROVEN LIAR.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:16 pmWhy even engage it?
Timmeh 253
More bought and paid for science to fool the REALLY stupid and brainwashed like YOU. You dont really think it works on normal people do you? My GOD you are ignorant
May 5th, 2009 at 10:16 pmTimmeh SPEWS:
Try to keep an open mind folks. This is what I try to do at all times. I am open to changing my opinions.
BWAHAAHAAHAAHAAHAAHAAAAAAA.
Your a pathetic LIAR
May 5th, 2009 at 10:17 pmTimmeh, do you understand that the causes of global climate change have varied widely over the millennia?
The conditions that caused the climate to alter drastically four hundred thousand years ago will not be the same conditions that support the life we know on it today. Thus your citation of CO2 concentrations in relation to ancient climate change may have something to tell us, but it certainly does not prove that CO2 increases always follow warming. The well-understood dynamics of the Greenhouse Effect predict that a rise in concentrations of greenhouse gases, of which CO2 is one, will result in more of the sun’s heat being trapped in the atmosphere.
You don’t seem to accept this basic principle of a commonly-understood climatological theory for some reason.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:18 pmA well known factor Timmeh is the brainwashed moron factor. That is YOU shilling for what you have been told to beleive and you being WWWAAAAAAYYYYYY to stupid to even TRY to think for yourself. You sad pathetic and stupid beyond human comprehension. The Sun will never dawn on a non stupid day for you Timmeh so Rush will just have to continue to do all your thinking for you but excuse us if the only thing you provide US is a free clown show. Just put on the red nose and size 18 shoes and get it over with
May 5th, 2009 at 10:20 pmAgain, you assert that we are “uncomfortable” yet you fail to offer any evidence that this is so. All you’re doing, it seems to me, is imputing an emotional basis for our arguments as a means to discredit them without having to address the real issues we raise.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:22 pmJebus, Tim is so full of shite. Open-minded my butt!
May 5th, 2009 at 10:24 pmYou keep posting from a site that’s a right wing front propped up by BIG OIL to deny global warming.
The “scientists” are not climatologists but instead are various scientists and teachers who hold various degrees outside of the field of climatology.
In fact, the head of the center, Craig Idso, isn’t even a climatologist. He’s not even a Geologist!
His degree is …..wait for it….. wait for it……
….in GEOGRAPHY!
:|
So go ahead. Call us stupid for taking our information on climatology from the international community of climatologists, and from the geologists and climatologists at NASA.
Meanwhile you continue to take your information, from a guy and his brother in Arizona, who are sponsored by Big Oil and holds a degree in “GEOGRAPHY”.
:|
Next time you get a toothache, let me know.
I know a great obstetrician and would be happy to give you his number.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:24 pmMAD Props to Wayneboro for taking the Vacuous One to school. Wayne really sliced and diced our Timmeh tonight. Good Job Wayne!
May 5th, 2009 at 10:24 pmWaynebro, not Wayneboro. Sorry Wayne.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:25 pmTimmeh, we’ve been debating your claims and we’ve debunked all of them. Please refrain from projecting your character flaws on those of us who recognize your BS for what it is.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:27 pmNo problem. I kinda like the idea of a town named after me.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:28 pmOh and by the way, lets not forget Craig’s brother, who is acting “President” of the EXXON MOBILE sponsored site you keep posting from.
He has a PHD too.
:|
In PHILOSOPHY.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:32 pmWaynebro, not Wayneboro. Sorry Wayne.
No problem.
Yeah, until Wayne A. and the other Wayne show up! ;)
May 5th, 2009 at 10:33 pmOh come on! The evidence that CO2 causes global warming is just a scam to control the masses.
The science points away from this actually. The media loove to be sensational, like the swine flu was this huge epidemic, they get moe funding b/c of it.
This global warming thing is fantasy land.
As psychology states: repetition cancels reason. If you ae going to destoy the US economy with creating a host of wall steet traders who screwed everyone reasonantly. Why on earth would the USA strat a new trading group who can on margin manipulate the energy prices. That thee are so many poor people who cant afford energy now as it is.
Its a new tax to fund liberal groups with no science behind it
Creating cap and trade wall street traders and speculators and hedge fund traders will not sole the energy issue. But will make a lot of demos rich in their coffers from donatoins.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:34 pmDonations directly funded by the average joe through hihger energy costs.
How does that, help us, the average american
hmmm, I see your point.
How about “Waynesboro”?
May 5th, 2009 at 10:34 pmI’m a true believer in the laws of physics. I believe in the laws of motion so fiercely and passionately that I never test them (intentionally). Narrow minded. I know.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:34 pmWAYNEBRO Says: #
Jim Wolf359 Says:
Waynebro, not Wayneboro. Sorry Wayne.
No problem. I kinda like the idea of a town named after me.
Well you’ve got one, Waynesboro, Va. Lovely place at the foot of the Blue Ridge.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:39 pmTimmy thinks he’s a genius because the faux scientist use big words to explain photosynthesis. Like it’s some big revelation.
Yes when it’s the growing season plants use the CO2 in the environment. Guess what, deforestation doesn’t help that CO2 get absorbed does it. Neither does the spread of deserts in areas like Africa where Christians decided to bring agriculture to tribal areas and created massive droughts.
Interesting that your link doesn’t seem to explain to you how meteor or comets striking the earth create a “nuclear winter effect” blocking out the heat of the sun in the same way multiple large volcanoes did around the time Mt. St. Helen erupted only in a much bigger way. You and your “advisers” cherry pick the science just the way you cherry pick the bible to meet your agenda. Wise men tend to err on the side of caution. Of course that leaves you Repubes out of the equation.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:40 pmSo Tim’s spent his time in here tonight, selling his “climatology science” from a website paid for by EXXON OIL and “WESTERN FUELS ASSOCIATION”, that was started and managed by a Chairman who holds a degree in GEOGRAPHY, and a President who holds a degree in PHILOSOPHY.
But we’re the dumb ones for getting our information on climatology from the international community of Climatologists, and the Climatologists and geologists at NASA.
:|
Go figger.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:40 pmA stupid troll committing the ultimate blasphemy of claiming to be God? Cool! I can work with that.
You’re not God!
May 5th, 2009 at 10:41 pmI think you’re referring to the Bible as it was written 300 some years after Christ’s death and included all kinds of marketing ploys to get people into the church. But you should know that much.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:42 pmI like to test the law of gravity with Timmy’s head.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:44 pmY’know… I’m beginning to think this isn’t really “the ” God who’s posting on this site.
I think it’s maybe a regular human putting us on.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:44 pmI don’t think he’s “regular”. I think he’s “special” in the short bus way.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:46 pmYep, Waynebro, that just about sums it up. And it took how many comments?
Of course, throughout all of this, there is still the argument that by acting now to limit global warming, in doing so, our lessening oil dependency will be a plus on the national security side.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:47 pmCouldn’t resist.
from:http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/description.php
This is called the “Medieval Warm Period Project.” There is a ton of interesting SCIENCE here.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Timmy, Timmy, Timmy…!! Why don’t you just tell us that Jesus told you that climate change didn’t exist?
At least then, we could respect you for your faith – instead of scoffing at your wilfully obstinate stupidity.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:52 pmBTW, dear Timmy, repeatedly quoting from or linking to the same discredited website AIN’T proving any of your points, boy.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:54 pmI am just here as God to answer the truth. That no matter how arrogant man thinks he is.
He cannot control my daughter you call earth. She will be just fine without you in my experiment. There are a million planets I created to amuse my solypsistic conundrum of always going to be.
Watching this world play to its end is no more than you playing solitaire and losing.
You dont know what influences outside of the game I am put you in. So none of you will ever know the truth of what is real.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:54 pmAnyone who decides he figured it out, is wrong b/c they dont now what influences God outside of the experiment I wrote
Jeez, Tim, you still don’t get the fact that you continue to use a biased source! You can quote them from here to eternity, and they’re still a biased source!
May 5th, 2009 at 10:54 pmHi, Annie, more great minds… :D
May 5th, 2009 at 10:55 pmWayne,
Not that it would make any difference to you, but if you want climatologists that DO NOT agree with you they are out there. Plenty of ‘em.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:55 pmTim..I can’t resist either,
May 5th, 2009 at 10:56 pmJust because they use big words doesn’t make it science.
Sorry, not to be redundant but I was wrong about Craig Idso’s brother being “President” of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, which is the group authoring the site Tim has been repeatedly quoting from.
Craigs brother is the “VICE President” of the group.
Craigs, DAD “Sherwood B. Idso is the President of the group.
Craig is of course the Chairman of the site, and lead “scientist”.
Sherwood B. Idso holds his PHD in PHILOSOPHY.
Craig D. Idso holds his PHD in GEOGRAPHY
Keith E. Idso holds his PHD in BOTANY
:|
And their sister, Juliane M. Idso is the “Operations Manager” of the group.
She holds a BS in Finance.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:57 pmJane,
Here’s the thing. EVERY single time I have posted on TP on this subject the true believers here have attacked ANY source I cite, no matter who it is!
You see, facts get in their way.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:57 pmSome of you here are simply engaging in the oldest tactic there is – attack your opponents credibility.
Sorry, but it just doesn’t wash so quit congratulating yourselves…
May 5th, 2009 at 10:58 pmLibellula saturata Annie Says:
Timmy, Timmy, Timmy…!! Why don’t you just tell us that Jesus told you that climate change didn’t exist?
But, Jesus told me it did exist! And worse, that I’m responsible for “the just and proper use of God’s creation” Wish he’d make up his mind…
May 5th, 2009 at 10:59 pmOh and just FYI for anyone who’s interested, one of the “SCIENTIFIC ADVISERS” on the site is Donald Paul Hodel.
:|
Donald Paul Hodel is the Chairman of the Summit Power Group.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:01 pmYou have to admit, though—God being an opinionated and somewhat sloppy thinker explains a lot.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:02 pmTimmy, why don’t you tell us what the down side of reducing the use of foreign oil or greenhouse gas emmissions is?
May 5th, 2009 at 11:03 pmralph at #263,
Well, it is also instructive to study recent climate conditions. See the reference to the Medieval Warm Period Project I provided. It’s worth reading up on.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:03 pmIn 1999 the IDSO’s and their “organization” was commissioned by the “GREEN EARTH SOCIETY” to produce a paper entitled “The Impact of the Rising Atmospheric CO2 Concentration”.
:|
The “GREEN EARTH SOCIETY” is a front group for “WESTERN FUELS ASSOCIATION”.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:04 pmTim Vaculik Says:
Some of you here are simply engaging in the oldest tactic there is – attack your opponents credibility.
Well, old or not it’s a legitimate “tactic”. If someone is known to twist the truth it’s no sin to consider the source when evaluating an argument.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:05 pmYet “TIM” tried to suggest they had no ties to “Big Oil”.
:|
Go figger.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:05 pmOrganized religion is religion’s worst enemy. It’s obvious to anyone who thinks about it.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:06 pmTim Vaculik Says:
Wayne,
Not that it would make any difference to you, but if you want climatologists that DO NOT agree with you they are out there. Plenty of ‘em
Please provide a link to a single, peer reviewed, climatological study that supports your claim. Or, even a single independent climatologist.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:07 pmTim’s taking his “climatology” science from an Arizona family who holds degrees in BOTANY, GEOGRAPHY and PHILOSOPHY, and that’s sponsored by EXXON MOBILE and WESTERN FUELS ASSOCIATION.
:|
And he has the audacity to laugh at us.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:07 pmTim, you ignorant (bleep). (Props to Dan Akroyd)
Once again you quote a source that was commissioned by “big oil”. And they insist on quoting legends and hearsay that predates accurate measurements of the relevant data.
You ignore the modern scientific consensus that human emissions are to blame for the current global warming.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:09 pmI’ve been asking him all night for just one “climatologist” not associated with Big Oil or Energy.
He’s yet to produce one single one.
Just page after page of bullsh$t from the IDSO family, and their BIG OIL sponsors.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:11 pmDamn filter! Apparently we can’t post s-l-u-t.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:13 pmThey’re not just biased Jane.
They’re not qualified.
Collectively the head of the site is a SINGLE REPUBLICAN CHRISTIAN FAMILY, who live in Arizona, and hold PHD’s in PHILOSOPHY, BOTANY and GEOGRAPHY.
:|
Sort of like getting legal advice from a dentist.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:15 pmWAYNEBRO Says:
I’ve been asking him all night for just one “climatologist” not associated with Big Oil or Energy.
He’s yet to produce one single one.
Just page after page of bullsh$t from the IDSO family, and their BIG OIL sponsors.
Ain’t it sad? The bloody Reichwhiners seem to be impervious to simple logic.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:15 pmI’m going to do some of you a favor, but the real reason is I’m tired of reading the bogus crap Wayne is providing in an attempt to deflect the discussion away from his lack of debating ability.
Let’s assume for the sake of argument that everything Wayne says about the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change is true. Let’s assume that ALL the research cited on the site, even peer-reviewed articles that the center didn’t write or fund is all bogus. Let’s assume that this is so even if the articles come from sources Wayne likes. Let’s give credence to all the innuendo Wayne wants us to believe about them.
Now. If we are to accept all this as the truth, WE HAVE TO BELIEVE that Wayne is 100% credible.
Is that reasonable?
May 5th, 2009 at 11:18 pmHeh!
I bet Timmeh depends on the Westboro Baptist Church (Fred Phelps’s family) for info on gay issues.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:19 pmThe truth is this: people like Wayne are OBNOXIOUS because they engage in DISHONEST tactics.
You see folks, it doesn’t matter WHAT source I cite, what web sites I reference, what peer-reviewed articles I quote, what books I suggest, what climatologists I provide… you get the picture.
True believers like Wayne here have no use for the facts or even for a real debate.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:23 pmWe congratulate Rep. Mike Pence for having the courage to state the truth regarding the global warming/cap and trade scam.
As we can see, Obama’s brainwashed lemmings focus on intimidating, demonizing and destroying those daring to speak the truth. Those unwilling to support the scam are supposed to be in “Exxon’s pocket” or morons. Meanwhile, nothing is said about scientists receiving millions from the scammers to find new ways to brainwash us daily with the global warming/cap and trade scam.
In spite of the intimidation and demonization, 32,000 American scientists have signed onto a petition that states that there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate…” http://www.petitionproject.org
And uncontrolled by the scammers, top Japanese scientists have also concluded that global warming is NOT caused by human activity. http://www.thecitizen.com/~citizen0/node...
Australians are not buying the scam either… http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25400914-7583,00.html
Informed and freedom-loving Europeans like Czech (and EU) president Vaclav Klaus says, “environmentalism is the new communism and climate change is a dangerous myth.” And Lord Christopher Monckton says, “The forces of darkness in the environmental movement want create a new dark age in which humanity is pushed back to the Stone Age and without the right to light a fire.” http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2009/090310climate_warming_conf.html
May 5th, 2009 at 11:23 pmTim Vaculik Says:
Now. If we are to accept all this as the truth, WE HAVE TO BELIEVE that Wayne is 100% credible.
Is that reasonable?
No sir, it’s a poorly drawn conclusion , it only means that Wayne is 100% credible when he cites the problems with your bogus source. I believe this is why you are unfit to evaluate scientific methodology.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:25 pmWho said anything about having to believe “ME”?
We’re providing Climatology information from climatologists, and the scientists of NASA. I realize they’re not rocket scientists……
:|
…well, actually they ARE rocket scientists….and geologists, and climatologists, and the ones who know more about the earth than anyone, anywhere,… and you’re giving us information from a site run by “THE IDSO FAMILY” of AZ, who collectively hold PHD’s in GEOGRAPHY, BOTANY and PHILOSOPHY.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:26 pmTimmeh:
I have had several long and loud debates with WAYNEBRO. But? I can’t fault his logic on this one.
You keep quoting a single source that is, frankly, suspect in their motivations and conclusions. We have provided links to sources that expose the agenda of said source.
One need not accept everything WAYNE or I present as gospel. We just happen to be right on this issue.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:27 pmSo in dealing with obnoxious true believers one ultimately has to simply say enough is enough because there really is no engagement at all.
It’s not possible to debate someone who stands not upon reason or facts, but innuendo, hearsay and lies.
The best example I can give of someone like this is Keith Olbermann.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:28 pmTim, from what I’ve seen the lack of debating ability is in you. Wayne has provided more than enough material for your “debate”. You just choose not to engage.
Coward.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:29 pmAntonioSosa,
Thank you!
May 5th, 2009 at 11:31 pmAontonioSosa Says:
You site a Lyndon Larouche Publication for your Proof?
May 5th, 2009 at 11:32 pmGreat sense of humor. I’ll give you that.
General Electric, owner of the NBC network, that includes MSNBC and CNBC, expects to make BILLIONS at our expense from the Obama cap and trade scheme. Is it any wonder then that the NBC networks are totally pro-Obama agenda driven, and are using the bully pulpit to promote his legislative proposals?
May 5th, 2009 at 11:32 pmYou’ve only cited one.
And that one is run by a family named “IDSO”.
And the IDSO’s hold PHD’s in BOTANY, GEOGRAPHY and PHILOSOPHY.
And the EXXON funding can be found on both the IRS website, and on EXXONS own donor list site.
Try going back to your own site, and actually reading it.
Their names are right there.
President Sherwood B. Idso. He holds his PHD in PHILOSOPHY.
Chairman Craig D. Idso. He holds his PHD in GEOGRAPHY
Vice Presient Keith E. Idso. He holds his PHD in BOTANY
And their sister, Julian M Idso is the “operations manager”.
She holds a BS in FINANCE.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:33 pmWayne,
You did. You are the one making a multitude of claims concerning sources I’ve cited.
I’m sure everyone here is ready to believe you 100%
May 5th, 2009 at 11:33 pmI’m thinking you never took a debating class or a philosophy class and you certainly never took a science class. In fact it seems like the only lessons you learned were taught by Karl Rove.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:34 pmWayne,
The truth is that you are simply making false accusations and denigrating the integrity of HUNDREDS of scientists and researchers.
You can’t back it up either. So all we have is YOUR credibility to go on if we are to believe the sources I cited are “bogus”
Yeah, you are 100% credible all right…
May 5th, 2009 at 11:34 pmDoddlebrain,
Your noodle is limp…
May 5th, 2009 at 11:36 pmYeah that’s why they have “Morning Joe” and CNBC. And when I worked in credit finance at an investment banking firm every deal was funded by General Electric Credit Corporation. You idiots will believe anything.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:37 pmAntonio,
Hit ‘em with the companies Al Gore and Maurice Strong have set up to make untold MILLIONS off theis carbon trading scheme.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:37 pmcredit finance = corporate finance
May 5th, 2009 at 11:38 pmWayne,
It’s a (dis)credit to this blog and the people who post here that your tactics are applauded, but then again you are in good company aren’t you?
May 5th, 2009 at 11:40 pmAh well. Again, I’ll say it was fun and to a certain extent entertaining, but I’m through wasting my time for tonight.
Strike that. Maybe it wasn’t a waste after all. Who knows how many lurkers are now reading up on climate change at http://www.co2science.org?
May 5th, 2009 at 11:42 pmTim Vaculik says @ 331
WRONG, FAIL. President Gore makes not one dime off his work.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:42 pmDon’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out Tim.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:43 pmTim, did you ever provide a scientist that refutes global warning that wasn’t on that list provided by Waynebro?
I see where you believe he doesn’t have debating skills but I can’t locate where you provided any independent evidence.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:44 pmAntonioSosa, you have to stop believing the things you hear on Fox and from Limbaugh.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
GO AHEAD TIM, PROVIDE SOME PROOF.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:46 pm“You see folks, it doesn’t matter WHAT source I cite, what web sites I reference, what peer-reviewed articles I quote, what books I suggest, what climatologists I provide… you get the picture.”
No, Tim. You continue to quote from ONE source, which obviously a little computer research would reveal as biased, and underqualified. Despite repeated requests, you have come up with nothing else.
Perhaps you’d prefer to debate whether developing renewable green energy resources would be good for our national security?
May 5th, 2009 at 11:48 pmG’night, Timmeh. You did, indeed, waste your time. We’ve examined your source and we’ve found it lacking.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:48 pmAs I read Tim hoovertongue I’m reminded of the turd blossom.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:48 pmAnd everyone knows about the “GREENING EARTH SOCIETY”.
It’s common knowledge now. Craig and Keith were hired by them to write their 1999 report entitled “”The Impact of the Rising Atmospheric CO2 Concentration”
And it’s public knowledge now that the Greening Earth Society was a front group set up by WESTERN FUELS ASSOCIATION.
Here. From Wikipedia
So you see, I’ve presented you with nothing but facts, and you’ve done nothing but whine like a little baby about it.
It’s not my fault you decided to come in tonight and start posting garbage from the IDSO family and trying to sell it as science.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:49 pmFinally, I just read ALL the bios on the co2science web site and I am now even MORE OFFENDED by Wayne’s posts.
I leave it to you folks to go read for yourself. People who argue as Wayne has tonight have 000% credibility.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:50 pm“Maybe it wasn’t a waste after all.”
No, Tim, apparently it was a waste.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:51 pmRHF,
You’re a day late and a dollar short, my friend. goodnight.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:53 pmGood Night Tim Vaculik…
May 5th, 2009 at 11:58 pm#
#
The BIOS show what I showed.
Three PHDS for the IDSO Father and two sons, Craig and Keith.
Keiths in BOTANY.
Craigs in GEOGRAPHY
And their dads “Sherwood” has his in PHILOSOPHY.
That’s what the site shows, as does their BIOS in a dozen other places online, including Wikipedia.
And I looked at the first “science adviser” on the site, Mr Baker, who holds a degree in AGRICULTURE.
If you have some evidence to refute this, by all means feel free to produce it.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:58 pmTimmy, I asked you about this way back at 300 and you never answered.
May 5th, 2009 at 11:59 pmWHY?
You claimed earlier that they were not associated with Big Oil.
I proved that you were wrong, and they are directly tied to major big oil, including EXXON and WESTERN FUELS ASSOCIATION.
And you also claimed this;
Well, if there are “Plenty” of them, then why have you failed to produce even one?
May 6th, 2009 at 12:01 amKudos those Timmy, you are such a good little Nazi:
May 6th, 2009 at 12:01 am
OT:
Good evening, dbadass. I spotted a purple finch and a flock of cedar waxwings. I really love spring.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:04 amEven nailed down and caught in his lies Timmy keeps repeating the propaganda. Somewhere in hell Hitler is smiling on you Timmy.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:04 am:|
Tim’s leaving because Sherwood Idso called him up and told him to stop “helping”.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:05 amGoodnight, Shayne, Waynebro, dbadass, rhf. Back to work tomorrow. :(
May 6th, 2009 at 12:05 amSo about those stem cells….
May 6th, 2009 at 12:06 amGoodnight, pete – we’ve had several purple finches and yellow finches at our feeders.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:07 amLater Jane and cheer up.
Having a job in a recession calls for a happy face.
:)
May 6th, 2009 at 12:07 amPence is part of the Republican leadership and he is a poster boy for what is wrong with the Republican Party. Not only did he embarrass himself with these downright silly comments he also told a flat lie — a disturbing habit for Republicans these days. Pence claimed that it was a Republican Congress that balanced the budget during the Clinton presidency. The record clearly shows that the key piece of legislation responsible for the budget being brought into balance did not receive a single Republican vote in the Senate. They were the problem, not the solution. This was best said by Matthews we he said “this is why Americans don’t trust the Republicans”.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:11 am“Now. If we are to accept all this as the truth, WE HAVE TO BELIEVE that Wayne is 100% credible.”
No we don’t but it sure proves that you’re a LIAR.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:14 amHe already showed you the facts that they’re NOT even scientist and are payed by oil companys.
Tim Vacuum Says:
Maybe it wasn’t a waste after all. Who knows how many lurkers are now reading up on climate change at http://www.co2science.org?
Probably none.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:15 amAw Jane, you just got here. :=)
May 6th, 2009 at 12:20 amUnfortunately the only bird handing around here was a “dodo”.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:21 amNow, Shayne. There’s no reason to dis the dodo. It was the dominant life-form on its island before we stupid humans killed them off.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:30 amDoodlebug,
May 6th, 2009 at 12:42 amGE also makes (made?) nuclear power plants. Westinghouse (which owned CBS for many years) also made nuclear power plants. Ronald Reagan was on GE’s payroll for a long time, travelling the country extolling the virtues of GE. GE might not have paid any tax at all while Reagan was president.
GE still does make Nuclear power plant systems and controls. They just are not used in THIS country. Except if you count the replacement parts for maintainance. Quite a few Manufacturing Contractors here in Silicon Valley are staying afloat because of this.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:47 amOops, the dodo wasn’t here, just the stupid human.
May 6th, 2009 at 12:54 amIt’s fascinating that the trolls think GE has a liberal agenda. Fools.
May 6th, 2009 at 1:01 amThe tilt of the Earth as it travels around the sun has caused ice ages to come and go in the past. But thousands of climate scientists agree that what is currently happening is due to CO2 buildup in the atmosphere from our pollution and deforestation. There is not a single peer-reviewed article debunking this.
May 6th, 2009 at 1:13 amDoodlebug Shayne Says:
It’s fascinating that the trolls think GE has a liberal agenda. Fools.
Indeed. GE, one of the largest military contractors and beneficiaries of military spending, has become a group of “far-left loons” because they sign Keith Olbermann’s checks.
May 6th, 2009 at 1:16 amGod can’t spell “solipsism”?
That’s weird.
Tim’s weird, too.
They should both hang out with more scientists.
May 6th, 2009 at 1:17 amC’mon, stupid trolls. I’m ready for bed and you still have not provided a single source that can’t be directly attributed to a energy industry shill or religious/political wacko.
May 6th, 2009 at 1:27 amAll the deniers have to do is seed doubt. It’s an easy job, if you can get it.
May 6th, 2009 at 1:38 amSeriously, WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE??
May 6th, 2009 at 2:11 am.
Is this the channel that’s currently running the WAYNEBRO TROLL SHOW?
.
May 6th, 2009 at 2:17 am.
Mike Pence and all the “believers” would rather see us all dead…
… Then they would feel vindicated. NO?
.
May 6th, 2009 at 2:29 amPence: I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution
Contradict much Pence?
May 6th, 2009 at 2:44 amthanks…
http://www.halimdiktas.tr.gg
May 6th, 2009 at 4:34 amGood evening, dbadass. I spotted a purple finch and a flock of cedar waxwings. I really love spring
May 6th, 2009 at 4:36 amsohbet
I THANK
May 6th, 2009 at 6:44 amSesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
SesliSohbet
SesliChat
sesli ve görüntülü chat
sesli ve görüntülü sohbet
Chat
sohbet MaviSakaL
Pence’s biggest talent is talking out of both sides of his mouth. I’ve said it from the start of his political career. Pence can take any topic, know nothing about it and speak for half an hour. Pence will blather on, say nothing fact-based and almost always contradict himself in an effort to keep talking.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:19 amThe key with Pence is to focus on making him accountable and make him be fact-based. Pence will fold like the front seat of two-door Ford Falcon.
The GOP is really “stupid” when it comes to science and the record speaks for itself. They misused scientist research.
- That wad-of-spit Boehner compares CO2 ‘emissions’ to “cow farts.”
-Bachmann thinks CO2 is a “by-product” of what as she never explains herself coherently enough like all the other hot air mass coming from her HAZMAT mouth.
-Gohmert (R-TX) received $22,500 in contributions from the coal sector and $212,313 from Big Oil — enough to pay a mythical $3100 tax for 76 years. WE KNOW HE’S A LOBBYIST WHORE he’ll say anything to get the money.
-Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) he fabricated and distorted a 2008 report by “Green Recovery: A New Program to Create Good Jobs and Start Building a Low-Carbon Economy.”
Not a bright group of people to talk “energy” with,especially when they who lie and distort the facts with “no” solutions?
May 6th, 2009 at 8:19 amPence is an idiot! he is the same guy who back in 2005, I think it was, said it is “safe” in Baghdad, and “people can go for a stroll to the market, like going to the mall or a walk in the park on a Sunday afternoon…..” especially since he and the others in the codel were being escorted by Blackhawk Security guards and wearing bullet-proof vests, while they were doing it!! I;m glad he went on with Chris Matthews…these RW nutcases come out looking so ridiculous…we get to see them for the shills they really are!!
May 6th, 2009 at 8:51 amThe Republicants have evolved into a cancer that has metastisized their rationale centers in their brain. They can no longer think rationally. They are devoid of thought processes that make us human, ergo, they are not human, ergo they should squashed like the putrid pile of protoplasm they have evolved into.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:58 amRepublicans hate facts stated that a CO2 site was funded by power and coal interests and then called it unscientific propaganda. They went on to give realclimate.org as a valid site.
Does realclimate.org pass the same test?
Realclimate.org is funded by Environmental Media Services, founded in 1994 by Arlie Schardt, former communications director for Al Gore’s 2000 Presidential campaign.
EMS is closely allied with Fenton Communications.
Fenton Communications client list includes organizations associated with a diverse array of social issues, but they are most known for their work with liberal causes such as MoveOn.org and Greenpeace
Remember kiddies, bias only counts if it happens to be against your beliefs.
May 6th, 2009 at 5:02 pmRemember moron, NASA is not “Al Gore’s” front. It’s the only scientific group to place a human being on another world.
You know, those guys. And they say you’re wrong. And before your brainfarts and tells you it’s because they want to please President Obama, remember.
They came out with their data back when the Bush administration who was denying global warming, was still in power.
Not to mention The IPCC , a scientific intergovernmental body set up by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), which comprises the foremost climatologists and experts in the field, who ALL concur on the man made causes of global warming, and it’s reality and impact.
The only people who disagree, are a tiny handful of non experts, scientists who mostly have their degrees in OTHER fields, who are propped up by big oil.
Get your facts straight moron.
Then you won’t look so stupid.
May 6th, 2009 at 5:37 pmVery few individuals could possibly be as stupid as our friend Tim. If the oil companies would spend millions to fund shill “scientists”, they would most likely employ the sorts of traitors of the human race as our friend Tim here. Those that would sell out the human race are the lowest form of life on this planet. Best thing for Tim would be a frontal lobotamy, and then a straight jacket in a white padded room. Maybe then followed by some intensive shock therapy. Whether he believes the drivel he is spewing or he is a shill, the world world would be much better without him in the gene pool.
May 6th, 2009 at 6:14 pmThe earth is flat, the sky is held up by big elephants, women should never drive faster than 20 mph and they are property, the moon is made of blue cheese, I’m going to heaven you’re going to heck, pot is deadly and cigarettes/alcohol are safe ’cause they are legal, (speaking of legal) water boarding is not torture just an assisted bath… and many more fallacies are perpetrated on us by these god fearing, science stupid, law are good for you but not me Republicans. Please can some one in power put them out of my misery?
May 6th, 2009 at 6:46 pmman made global warming arguement states that because as time has gone on and carbon dioxide emissions have increased, the average temperature of earths oceans has risen, there is a correlation. The problem being that correlation does not prove causation, that is why so many climatologists disagree with the likes of the politician Al Gore who refuses to debate anyone, and who has a monetary interest in pushing for carbon credits and taxes.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:14 pmI see that wayne is still making false statements and attempting to pass them off as fact:
THis is simply false and there’s plenty of readily available info out there to prove it. First of all, the IPCC was actually made up mostly of NON-SCIENTISTS. It was made up mostly of politicians and U.N. bureaucrats. In fact, there were actually scientists who demanded that their names be REMOVED from the final report because the results of the group’s work was dictated by POLITICS, not the science!
Further, there have been numerous things that have happened since the IPCC that clearly show that the findings are not supported by objective climate science!
May 6th, 2009 at 7:38 pmMan, I’ve seen stupid, but you take the cake.
Al Gore did a show based on the findings of theIPCC , a scientific intergovernmental body set up by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), which comprises the foremost climatologists and experts in the world.
None of this has anything to do with Al Gore other than he decided to get involved too to help spread the word from the international community of climatologists.
Now, if you would like to prove you’re not a liar, produce these “climatologists” who disagree with him.
We’ve been waiting for two days for one of you lying throwbacks from the stone age to produce one, and so far not one of you idiots have managed to produce one.
Yet you come in, after a thread is dead, and post your ignorant lies.
So, produce the names of the Climatologists liar
Hint.
You can’t.
Because there are none.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:41 pmAnd Tim you’re a bigger fool than the rest.
Because the IPCC is a body designed to take the work of climatologists and represent it to the world.
See like before, you ignore the actual climatologists behind the group. The WMO and UNEP contains the foremost climatologists in the world.
This is not in contest.
But hey, you’ve got a big mouth.
Put up.
Go on dickhead, show us these climatologists you speak of.
Because last night you showed us none, other than the IDSO family who doesn’t have a single climatologist in the family, lol.
Produce one moron.
We’ve been waiting for two days now.
Produce one single “climatologist” who disagrees with CURRENT SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITIES PUBLISHED POSITION ON GLOBAL WARMING, who is not funded by Big Oil.
I’ll be waiting right here.
Always.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:45 pmI think I’ll adopt wayne’s debate tactics as they seem SO popular here!
I say that the so-called “scientists” who support the theory of catastrophic man-made global warming are nothing but shills bought and paid for by George Soros and others.
Now wayne, YOU have to prove me wrong. We can’t believe a thing these scientists write because it’s tainted by left-wing money.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:46 pmGeorge Soros doesn’t run NASA.
George Soros doesn’t fund NASA.
George Soros doesn’t fund the WMO or the UNEP.
So once more you lie.
Now, you’ve made claims for two days.
I’ll be waiting here for you to produce one asswipe.
And until you do, you’ve got nothing to say.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:48 pmWayne,
I’m waiting! Where’s your evidence, huh? C’mon wayne PROVE your scientists are not shills. What are you waiting for wayne?
May 6th, 2009 at 7:48 pmWayne,
You can’t produce ONE scientists that’s not a shill for the left-wing, socialist global warming hoax can you?
I didn’t think so.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:49 pmWayne,
Well? Where’s the proof your so-called scientists are NOT tainted, hmmmmmm?
May 6th, 2009 at 7:50 pmWayne,
You’ve made some pretty strong claims here, can you back them up? C’mon wayne…
May 6th, 2009 at 7:51 pmScience Magazine
May 6th, 2009 at 7:52 pmWell, it appears that wayne has nothing to back up his claims after all.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:52 pmNATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions
“Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth’s atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise” [p. 1 in (5)]
National Academy of Sciences
May 6th, 2009 at 7:54 pmThe IPCC is tainted. It has no credibility and neither do you if you quote them.
Wayne, produce evidence that your scientists are NOT tainted. It’s OBVIOUS they are. Prove they are not. C’mon wayne.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:54 pmNice try wayne. Try harder. You can’t use the National Academy of Sciences because you already said one of their members was a shill for big oil.
TRY, wayne!
May 6th, 2009 at 7:55 pmWayne,
It appears you are all talk and no action. All hat and no cowboy.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:56 pmMay 6th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
wayne,
Still waiting for you to PROVE beyond ANY shadow of a doubt that your scientists are credibler. It’s obvious they are not – they are funded by left-wing ant-business people.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:57 pmwayne,
So much for you debating ability and your “credibility”
hahahahahahahahahahaha
May 6th, 2009 at 7:58 pmThere.
Now you’ve got three independent scientific sources including the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.
All say you’re wrong.
Now.
Time for you to put up or shut up.
And until you do, I’ll let you squirm a bit, run your mouth, then come back and post some more.
:D
Just for the pleasure of making you look ignorant.
May 6th, 2009 at 7:58 pmThe National Academy of Sciences is not run by “George Soros” and has no political affiliation.
It is the “NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES”.
Sorry, you lose.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:00 pmAnd to quote the King of this thread: “THis thread is dead”
Anyone who posts after this is an idiot and a moron!
************************************************************
The preceding diatribe was brought to you by wayn’e evil, conservative twin who thought he’d use THE SAME DEBATING TACTICS as his hero!
Thanks, wayne!
May 6th, 2009 at 8:00 pmGo ahead though.
Tell us how the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES is not a viable source for information on science.
Come on. Do it.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:01 pmI’ll be back later moron, so run your mouth.
It will be corrected later, and you’ll have to start all over again.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:02 pmEvery listen now to the troll who is going to tell you all how the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE is not a good source for science information.
Let him drive a few more nails in his coffin, proving what ignorant home schooled throwbacks the right wing is comprised of.
Now deny it good little troll.
:|
I’ll be back shortly to check on you.
May 6th, 2009 at 8:08 pmWhile I share Waynebro’s conclusions about global warming, I have to agree with Tim about your debating tactics and others that are pro-global warming after having covered most of the discussion. You and others do frequently use straw men and personal attacks in your arguements which really just hurts your case. However in your case (waynebro) you do negate that by providing other well constructed arguements and most importantly well sourced material, the latter something Tim has repeatidly failed to do.
The CO2 website seems to be Tim’s only (stated) source for information, a site with questionable history that has cherrypicked science rather than debunk science claims to support their prestated mission of disputing global warming. I will grant you that both sides do ignore portions of science (either intentionally or unintentionally) that don’t fit very well with their arguements and that they are are prone to exaggeration or understatement. The problem is a good portion of the science you mentioned does not negate the factor of human contribution. The natural cycle of cooling & heating or the ebbs & flows of temperature isn’t at dispute, its the effect of mankind on the atmosphere that is. With a constant, unyielding & unrelenting pumping of huge amounts of CO2 that never existed in this “natural cycle”, in addition to deforestation and other measures that all contribute in one way or another.
Indeed alot of science about global warming continues to be revised, but if you look into whats being revised you’ll see its moved from questioning global warming’s existance to measuring its effects of wether its just bad, worse or terrible.
Please in the future include more sources to support your arguements and preferably try to rely on a more varried set of sources, hopefully ones that are supported by scientists. You critisize Waynebro’s debating tactics but he frequently posts sources (usually different) to back up his claims and he has asked several serious questions you’ve failed to answer where as you only respond with co2science in the rare cases you use a source.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:30 amBlow it out your rear.
If you think we don’t see what a slimeball sockpuppet for tim you are then you’re stupider than your base2 handle.
Tim’s been in here for days quoting from one single website run by a right wing neoconservative family from Arizona named the IDSO’s, and not one of them is a climatologist.
When his website was exposed for the Exxon funded shill site it was he started acting stupid and just saying effectively neener neener neener.
I gave him specifics, addressing the sources behind his propped up data, and giving him factual data from the US Academy of Sciences, NASA, the IPCC, the WMO and more.
And the more information I post, the more he says “neener neener neener” without posting anything having to do with the topic.
He’s just a right wing troll, he lost the debate and now he’s waiting for everyone to leave the thread so he can slip in and toss in his posts declaring victory to a debate he walked out on a day ago in defeat.
So blow it out your ear troll.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:40 amAnd if you’re wondering why I don’t accept your fake praise it’s because you lied, accusing me of using straw arguments which I do not.
Show me the straw argument.
Hint. You can’t.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:42 amNobody walks into the end of a debate that’s 400 comments long that people have put time in and then accuses the winners of the debate of “straw arguments” except a troll.
And if you think I’m wrong, feel free to prove it.
Point to the straw arguments I made.
You made the claim, but like your pal Tim, you never back it up with any facts.
When you can back your false accusations up let me know.
Otherwise crawl back into your hole.
And take YOUR straw argument with you.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:55 amIn the meantime, we’ll listen to the only real “rocket scientists” on the subject, NASA. The only scientific organization in all mankinds history, to land a human being on another world.
Deal with that, troll.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:57 am
May 7th, 2009 at 3:00 am
Facts you say?!?! John Coleman, Scientist, Founder of Weather Channel yea, he says all this global warming stuff, is “poppycock”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUxigSHv7Bk
Al Gore, scrub, corrupt politician,. but not as bad as one who wants to tax American’s for every single thing you do, even your cow’s farting tax (methane), go google that, oh yea!! I went there.I guess if we all get taxed enough that will cover maybe about a quarter of Obama’s Bailout, but we’ll be slaves by then so no matter really
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtDSwyCPEsQ
It’s okay to be a slave, as long as you feel patriotic right?
May 7th, 2009 at 11:37 amI don’t need to go hunting through the debate, there it is a perfect fresh example of your debating tactics, you disagreed with me so you insulted me then associated me with Tim’s viewpoint. I disagree with Tim wholeheartidly and I believe he is wrong, I clearly stated that I disagree with how he does not post credible sources but you’ve conveniently ignored that and went on to try to prove to me that global warming exists, something I’ve already admitted. You see my point ? My post wasn’t a specific attack at you but rather an observation from a formerly neutral 3rd party.
I wasn’t giving you fake praise or praise at all, the fact is you’re probably one of the few people here that did post multiple sources to back up your claims while others didn’t including tim. But before you start launching verbal attacks try reading your own posts. I didn’t come here to start a fight with you or tim for that matter, I don’t know either of you and I don’t really care. This seemed like a good debate and personally I’ve never seen someone who vocally disagrees with Global warming’s existence to such an extent which is why I joined in. I can understand disagreeing about the scale of the impact of global warming, not its existence.
May 7th, 2009 at 12:16 pmI didn’t associate you with Tim’s “viewpoint”. I just associated you with him and his tactics of coming into the end of the debate and “tagging” it with his opinion rather than stand up and voice that opinion when the players are there.
And yes.
You DO need to “go hunting through the debate” when you accuse someone of using straw arguments.
Only a two bit liar accuses someone of using straw arguments without pointing to ONE SINGLE STRAW ARGUMENT.
You don’t accuse people without evidence.
If you’ve got an example of me using a straw argument then show it.
Otherwise crawl back into that hole from whence you came liar.
Because anyone can accuse someone of anything, if there’s no need to produce proof of the accusation.
PROVE I used a straw man.
Or admit to being a two bit lying piece of sh$t.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:33 pmBetter idea dimwit.
Before you start launching your lying attacks, try producing a piece of evidence to back up your lies.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:36 pmOh and I did read my own posts dickhead.
And there isn’t a straw man among them.
You however crawl in when you think everyones gone to a days old thread, and try to seed it with the lie that people are using strawman, so you don’t have to actually produce any evidence, assuming the casual reader will just glance at the last comments and assume straw men were used.
It’s the tactic of a slimeball.
The workings of a weasel.
Too cowardly to enter the debate, for fear of showing what an inbred halfwit he is, so he slimes in, after the fact, accuses everyone of using straw arguments, purports his own half wit theories and watered down dogma, and then slips away, without bothering to provide one shred of evidence or even a single frame of reference to back up his false allegations and slander.
Which makes you sleazier and lower than your two bit friend Tim.
Because at least HE had the balls to enter the debate and provide some references, even if they were bad ones, to support his nonsense.
You on on the other hand produce nothing but inflammatory slander and mealy mouthed unsupported nonsense.
The fact that you wrap your turd in a fancy package with a bow on top, doesn’t change the smell.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:40 pmAnd the fact is there isn’t one single actual climatologist studying global warming, who agrees with the lies of the right.
Not one.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
But you trolls keep slipping into this days old thread trying to seed your lies, and I’ll keep coming back to check on you, and to correct you.
Keep arguing with NASA fools.
It’s one of the reasons why you’re losing elections.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:45 pmOh and here, I would be remiss if I didn’t expose this lie from another ignorant troll (probably the same one under a new sockpuppet), who likewise has to LIE, in order to sell his anti-global warming nonsense.
THIS TROLL SAYS:
Well, I pulled a BIO on your John Coleman, “SCIENTIST”.
And guess what I found.
:)
That’s right kiddies.
He’s no scientist.
He’s a WEATHER ANNOUNCER.
Oh he does hold a 4 year college degree from University of Illinois.
….wait for it….wait for it…..
IN JOURNALISM.
:D
So once more we see the right wing producing their “SCIENTIST” who disagrees with global warming, only to discover that they LIED.
He’s no scientist. Not even a meteorologist.
He’s the WEATHER GIRL.
No degree in ANY scientific field, whatsover.
:D
NEXT.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:54 pmJohn Coleman’s current job?
He presently works as an on-camera weather-caster at KUSI-TV in San Diego.
:D
There’s your right wing “scientist”.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:55 pmI did provide proof by showing a recent example of the same tactics you used on me, you did associate me with tim’s viewpoint and you spent the next few posts showing me how global warming is real and providing links like the nasa article which you clearly addressed to me. Therefore you’ve assigned the fake notion that I am anti-global warming and then went on to disprove it when I clearly was not anti-global warming, classic straw man. Additionally you also insulted me and continue to do so, which is an example of your use of personal attacks to discredit your opponents.
I don’t really have a vested interest in discrediting you, I like you believe in the seriousness of global warming, I’m not paid by big oil and I don’t really know you to warrant me launching a personal attack against you over the internet. All I did was provide criticism (constructive I hoped) of some of your debate tactics and made a point to note that you’ve also made other well constructed arguements backed by proof to show that you’ve made good arguements before and overall had presented a much better and more credible arguement than Tim. That was my criticism, take it or leave it thats up to you.
You certainly have a point about me coming late to the debate, I came across this article alot later then I would’ve liked. I certainly wish I was here earlier to poke more holes in Tim’s many flawed arguements but I wasn’t and you were so perhaps I get negative points for that, fair enough. But please don’t lump me in with the anti-global warming bunch and try to prove to me stuff I already know just because you disagreed with something I said.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:21 pmYou showed NO examples, and made up one of AFTER the fact of your accusations.
You can’t do that.
The difference between you and me junior, is when I accuse someone of using straw arguments, I prove it.
By showing those straw arguments and exposing them
All you’ve done, is accuse me with ZERO evidence, then when you didn’t like my response, said “THATS” the evidence.
It’s not.
You accused me of using straw arguments in a global warming debate, and I’m challenging you, …no, I”m DARING you to provide ONE SINGLE STRAW ARGUMENT from the debate you claimed that I used straw arguments in.
And you can’t.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:04 pmSure.
That’s why you came into a 400 post debate on global warming 2 days after it ended, and accused me of using straw arguments.
:|
Without providing one iota of evidence of straw arguments from the debate you accused me of using them in.
And you’re still running your mouth, burying my posts exposing more troll lies about “scientists”.
Don’t worry though. Until you produce evidence, I’ll continue to post valid proof of global warming and the consensus of the scientific community, after you’re done spewing your lies.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:08 pmNote folks, that troll calling itself 01101110110110, comes in with the troll calling itself lucent, to try and bury the thread in false accusations.
Lucent claimed Coleman was a SCIENTIST who debated global warming.
I proved that Coleman was NO scientist, but merely a “WEATHER ANNOUNCER”.
A “WEATHER GIRL” if you will.
And back comes 01101110110110 the sockpuppet, to cover up for his altar ego’s embarrassment at being once again exposed lying.
Quit lying troll, and produce one shred of evidence FROM THE DEBATE you accused me of using straw arguments in.
Until you do, everyone will see you for the liar you are.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:11 pmKeep arguing with NASA trolls.
It just makes you look more pathetic by the minute.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:12 pmYuck… So this is what it means to be pro-science: full of hostility, no love for anyone, nothing but enraged insults. Thanks for the demo. If it’s that or Pence, I’d vote for Pence.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:29 pmI don’t want to get involved with the pissing match that seems to be going on here, but I did want to provived one bit of requested information.
It was asked to provide one credible climatologist who didn’t subscribe to the current claims of extreme climate change.
Here is one: John Christy.
May 7th, 2009 at 4:03 pmGlobal warming: Fact or fiction?
Alright fine you didn’t like my example of the same debate tactics here is another, this is a recurring theme you use, the NASA arguement.
Here you’ve falsely assigned his belief that none of these things happened, when he made the point of questioning their motivation with regards to Global Warming rather than their scientific minds. You later easily defeated his arguement by noting the republicans were the goverment just recently and did have an active effort of silencing them. You’ve used the same tactic on everyone since, post the nasa link and if anyone disagrees then he is a moron for arguing that the moon landing never happened, which is clearly a straw man arguement. And for the record, I know both the moon landing & global warming are real, I’m not debating NASA’s objectivity.
My first post wasn’t targetted just at you, others have also used similar tactics even one accusing him of believing the earth was flat. That in addition to all the personal attacks you and others have used is all unnecessary when you can easily defeat his already weak arguements with proper facts. When you’re already winning, insults don’t really help.
Then there you go again, assigning me to the anti-global warming crowd by claiming I’m lucent and that I’m really just covering for myself, please don’t flatter yourself. I don’t know if its possible to verify through IPs but I’m not, believe it or not its up to you.
I just think you really need to calm down alittle, I wasn’t out to “get you” and I really don’t know Tim or lucent. I had hoped on debating Tim, not you, since he posted several times after he “quit”. Since he hasn’t returned and I seem to have unintentionally started an irrelevant debate with you I’ll stop posting until he tries to argue about global warming some more if he ever comes back. It is quite apparent you’ve taken my criticism as a personal attack and arguing this further is pointless, take it as a defeat if you want it doesn’t really matter.
May 7th, 2009 at 4:06 pmWhen it comes to people like Mr. Pence, you are arguing the wrong issues. He is a true believer allied with religious fundamentalists and the Creationist movement. Creationism is a political movement with a goal of making Christianity the country’s official religion and ultimately replacing the republican form of government with a theocracy. They are targeting school curricula with the idea of getting a foot in the door so as to weaken the First Amendment. If they are successful in discrediting or even removing scientific objectivism from school curricula, they will be able to bring up generations of citizens who will be less apt to question authority and to take part in the business of democracy. The Creationists are relentless. They lost on the Intelligent Design question in Pennsylvania. Now they are trying the same old arguments and tactics in Texas. You are fighting True Believers. It doesn’t matter that you have all scientific truth on your side. They have God’s truth on their side and they will never give up. Mr. Pence is one of their representatives in the Congress. Think about that.
May 7th, 2009 at 4:39 pmGet your facts streight before publishing lies like this one.
“evolution — an undeniable fact”
Evolution is not a proven fact, and never will be. There is more scientific evidence proving the creation fact that there is the laim brain Darwin THEORY, like huge Granite fields permiated with radiation halos that had such a short halflife that the whole lot of granite had to come into existance instantly. Like the huge decayed boat proven to be Naoh’s Ark. Like human foot prints in the same sedimentary layer as a huge dinosaur’s.
Darwin was a retard who made up evolution as a prank on humanity, and didn’t even believe it himself. He did however prove most people are retards like himself. It’s just mans way of denying God.
Life is to complex to have originated from a huge explosion guzillions of years ago. It took an eternal all powerfull inteligent being who can just speak things into existance.
E=MC2 proves all matter was created from energy, and even Einstien believed in God. Man has turned matter into energy, but only God could have turned Energy into matter, and HE did to creat the whole universe in only 6 litteral days.
May 7th, 2009 at 5:39 pmLOL the moon thing!!!
Take a good look at the moon rover with huge useless fenders bigger than a model-T has.
To say (as they do) that that thing was on the rocket that caried the crew up would be the equivilent of the shuttle delivering a mack truck into orbit. LOL
The moon landing was a joke and there are no footprints on the moon. Deep space is to hostile for a human to travel in.
May 7th, 2009 at 5:57 pmWaynebro, that is some “talk” yea, you just make yourself look so insecure.If people don’t see it my way, I’m gonna name call, cute and tell them they are trolls? You must spend ALOT of time “talking” on forums to even know the meaning much less use it to discredit other people.
When that isn’t enough “try to” discredit their source with your own third party info, that’s smart.
Just the internet, don’t take it to seriously.If you do, then you clearly have no life outside of behind the keyboard.Debates are nice, but unpleasant while debating are counter productive and at best childish.
May 7th, 2009 at 6:22 pmHere’s the problem: We live in a physical universe where all we know is what we can see, touch, or smell. When it comes to how it all began we have nothing to go on. Subjectively, we believe in miracles, eg, Genesis 1 & 2. The problem is: the Bible doesn’t say what God actually physically did in performing those miracles. Take light for example, how did a command issued by God in a supernatural realm we call Heaven become the thing we know as light? The Bible doesn’t say. I think God left it as a homework assignment for us to figure it all out for ourselves. The best we can do is to work out our own explanations based on what we see around us. Evolution is the only explanation – other than miracles – that we have. If someone has a better one, let’s hear it.
As for global warming: I guess 7 billion humans and their 2 billion automobiles aren’t a problem and we can just go on cutting down the world’s forests and fishing the life out of the seas. The glaciers are all melting and even Antarctica is starting to break up. No problem – we can do like the Dutch and build huge dikes around Florida and New York City.
May 7th, 2009 at 6:44 pmDon’t run your mouth troll.
Prove I’m wrong.
Like Tim, your idiot friend sockpuppets, you run your mouth, whine about name calling and my “3rd” party information, yet in all your self righteous whining and complaints, you cannot produce ONE SINGLE SOLITARY piece of evidence, to discredit me.
:|
Oh and by the way pinhead. Try READING KUSI-TV’s BIO on your boy Coleman, prior to launching your lies about my “3rd party information”.
I got it off their website nimrod.
He holds NO DEGREE.
He READS THE WEATHER ON TV.
Yet you called him a “SCIENTIST”, lol.
Proving every single name I called you, and will call you.
May 7th, 2009 at 7:09 pmLol, THATS your evidence? You took a day to dream up that?
Where did I “STATE” or “ASSIGN” this belief to him?
See those little squiggly things at the end of my sentences?
Well when you move from phonetics to actually learning English composition, you’ll learn that those are called “QUESTION MARKS”.
So now you, come into a thread a day after it’s close and moved off the main page, accuse me of using straw arguments, and when challenged to produce a single solitary one, you hem, you haw, you stall, and then you produce one of your own.
I blame this on your parents.
If you’re going to homeschool your kids, you need to be at least passably literate yourself.
:|
NEXT.
May 7th, 2009 at 7:15 pmI’m not sure who’s more stupid here.
The troll, or me for arguing with a troll so illiterate, he doesn’t know what a question mark looks like.
:|
It boggles the mind.
May 7th, 2009 at 7:17 pmThis is getting too easy.
A. YOU were never asked anything. TIM was.
But nowhere were you asked anything, so thanks for admitting to being just another sockpuppet identity for Tim.
B. John Christy helped draft and signed the American Geophysical Union statement on climate change and is a lead member of the IPCC and is a believer in global warming being caused by man.
Perhaps your problem is you didn’t understand the question.
We asked for climatologists who DON’T believe in global warming.
:|
Not ones who do.
May 7th, 2009 at 7:28 pmMay 7th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
NEXT
May 7th, 2009 at 7:34 pm:)
May 7th, 2009 at 7:40 pm:|
The RNC called and asked if you guys could stop “helping them” now.
May 7th, 2009 at 7:41 pm1st excuse me for getting in on this late. I read up to 100+ comments then went to 400+. let’s get info on me a little. I try & keep an open mind about things so let’s go. I’m more on the science side but I can see a little very little of the other side. I am beginning to think the ‘other side’ is really trying to bring the 2nd coming w/ there denial of what man is doing to the earth which I would say GOD put us in charge of taking care of. And to say that it is GOD’s will that this is how things are suppose to happen because we need to leave it in his hands, I think you are so sad. When/if you stand before your GOD & he asks what you did & you say you did nothing because it was his will. You will be in deep sh… That is the same as standing by while you watch someone kill someone else because it was GOD’s will. You do NOT stand by & watch someone kill someone else & you DON’T stand by while we do the same to his earth. Life is too beautiful to stand by & let it be destroyed by us. There is so much to say to you folks but I already know it is like ’spitting into the wind’ ..useless. You will believe what you want & I will believe what I want. The thing is if this is not man made but a thing of nature we still need to do SOMETHING or we WILL be a missing creature on your GOD’s planet which is what you seem/may want. I want to say so much. There is Texas & schools, people’s beliefs, baselines & so much more but to me talking on these msg. boards is wasted. I look at these places as the fringe for both the left & right & what does it accomplish? Do we get ANYTHING done from these msg. boards? DO WE? I feel we are in VERY DEEP TROUBLE & the next 50 years we will see this & I think that this is within most of the people’s lifetime on this msg. board. I know it is mine. I WANT SOLUTIONS OR POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS I DON’T WANT ‘SPITTING IN THE WIND’. I wish you folks all well because no matter your beliefs we will all need it. More than likely I will not comment anymore but I will come back & see how people take shots at me & miss my message.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:02 pmI’m sorry.
Did you have me confused with someone who actually believes you are ANOTHER “newcomer” to a discussion that is buried pages deep and days old, just to “put in your two cents worth”?
You really are an ignorant twit.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:12 pmHere. Lets take another look at “JOHN DOUGHS” “Climatologist who doesn’t believe in Global Warming”, lol.
John Dough, just “happened” in to answer a question posed to Tim.
Days after it was posed, and after the thread was removed off the front page of the blog.
Now, we all know this is actually Tim the Troll, but lets look at his “answer”.
This ones a keeper.
And here’s what John Christy, scientist with the IPCC and author of the AGU statement on Global Warming.
:)
May 7th, 2009 at 8:19 pmApparently you misunderstood the question “JOHN\TIM”.
We asked for Climatologists who did NOT believe in global warming.
:|
Not ones who do.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:21 pm:)
May 7th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
But don’t worry trolls.
I’ll be “checking in” regularly, to see if after two days of “claiming” that there are “plenty of climatologists who disagree with global warming”, whether you clowns can actually produce one.
:|
Two days, over 400 comments, dozens of claims that there are “plenty of them” and you’ve yet to produce ONE.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:26 pmDumb a$$ Tim could not come up with one scientist, not on the petroleum industried payolla list that opposes the cause of global warming. Not one! He is a shill for the petroleum industry, but anyone reading this thread sees how he was destroyed and made to look like a brain washed, holy roller repuglican that he is. Lock him up in a straight jacket, society need protection from him and all the George W F-tards out there running around.
May 7th, 2009 at 9:20 pmOK, so what do we do about it one way or the other? Go on trading irrelevant and ineffective insults, declare it a non-issue and ignore it, or get rich trading carbon credits? What?
May 7th, 2009 at 10:34 pmHey Waynebro, you know the difference between you talking trash behind your keyboard and how you would do it in person? The difference would be, as passive as I am punching you in the throat, would be almost a survival extinct.Your argument, is null and void.I bet you have posted more than anymore in this thread, life must be boring huh?
u fail at life :D
May 8th, 2009 at 12:21 amIt is easy to be a critic tool, when your anonymous. :)
May 8th, 2009 at 12:22 amAbout the same as you using physical threats behind your keyboard?
Shoot me your contact information tough guy. We’ll see how tough you are.
waynebro@yahoo.com
May 8th, 2009 at 3:22 amIn the meantime, you prove you fail at everything.
Because you can’t even win a debate.
You can’t provide a shred of evidence.
You produce idiotic, illiterate arguments and when cornered, you turn to idiotic threats from behind the comfort of your keyboard.
Typical troll. Too stupid to debate so he turns to death threats.
And yes, punching people in the throat is a death threat, since most people die from a crushed windpipe.
But it’s ok.
We both know you’re too much a pussy to do anything, ever.
Just like most inbred people (means your dad and mom were also your aunt and uncle) your brain seizes up in intellectual debate so you start threatening everyone, since you can’t deal with complicated things like words.
You lose troll.
NEXT.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:28 amIn the meantime, since you broke down and started with the death threats, lets look at why you broke down.
Here’s “Lucent’s” comment earlier.
So we see why the moron calling itself “lucent” is now turned to tantrums and juvenile baby threats.
Because he’s so stupid, he thought John Coleman, was a “SCIENTIST”.
And the reason he thought that is because he’s too inbred stupid to know the difference between a WEATHER CASTER, and a SCIENTIST.
Of course, when you’re home schooled in the ass end of a dilapidated double wide by a couple of throwbacks reminiscent of a Jane Goodall documentary, I imagine a “WEATHER CASTER” must seem like a Scientist.
It’s all a matter of perspective.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:36 amLet’s see, so far we’ve asked for just ONE actual Climatologist who denies global warming. We’ve waited for 3 days, over 400 comments, and so far, the all the trolls brains collectively have produced the following.
A BOTANIST.
A PHILOSOPHER
A person with a degree in GEOGRAPHY.
A WEATHER CASTER.
And a climatologist who BELIEVES in global warming.
Oh yea, and a little babies threat to “punch me repeatedly in the throat”.
:|
All that, and not one climatologist who believes in global warming.
You guys about done “helping” the RNC on the issue of global warming, or do you want to go some more?
May 8th, 2009 at 3:45 amWith so many stupid people around the world, science can’t really help much. No offense to anyone!
May 8th, 2009 at 7:46 amWAYNEBRO Says:
Apparently you misunderstood the question “JOHN\TIM”.
We asked for Climatologists who did NOT believe in global warming
No, I didn’t misunderstand the question, you selectively pulled information for what you wanted to hear and not his actual beliefs. Try this quote on for size.
“Christy isn’t worried.
‘Science is numbers,’ he said, and the numbers don’t back up the doomsayers who he concedes are the majority in the debate.
Yes, the Earth is warmer, but ‘Climate is always changing, up and down.’
Carbon dioxide is plant food, he said. There has been a 16 percent increase in global food production linked to the CO2 the industrial societies have put back in circulation.
Scientific models — a synonym for theory, Christy said — fail when subjected to actual testing.
He said his conclusions are based on empirical data that shows the Southeast is cooling, not heating; that thousands of years ago, the Arctic was warmer and Greenland did not melt; the snows of Mt. Kilimanjaro were already melting when Ernest Hemingway wrote his novel; places like Bangladesh are seeing their land mass grow; and as one pole loses ice, ice is gained at the other.
Christy is not worried about rising sea levels.
‘You don’t want to build a house on the Gulf Coast because there will be another hurricane,’ he said, but dismissing the notion that weather is more severe than in the past.
Christy said energy resources will evolve, but he’s not afraid fossil fuels will condemn Earth and humanity.”
May 8th, 2009 at 9:03 amOr how about this.
“‘Our ignorance of our climate system is enormous. Climate cannot be predicted,’ Christy said.
Schlesinger defended the current scientific models as ‘the best we have. It’s unrealistic if we think nothing should be done.’
Christy was unmoved, reiterating that when dire hypotheses are tested, the models fail.”
May 8th, 2009 at 9:09 am“The factors that influence climate are too numerous to document, much less understand from our present level of ignorance. …The alarmist media reports…become the source of downstream hysteria promoted by those with extreme environmental agendas. Such pronouncements by ideological environmentalists that the globe’s weather is worsening are acutally false.”
Source: “Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths” CEI, 2002
“I’ve often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue, that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system. Well, I am one scientist – and there are many – that simply think that is not true.”
Source: The Great Global Warming Swindle (Documentary, 2007)
“Will increases in CO2 affect the climate significantly? Are significant changes occurring now? Climate models suggest the answer is yes, real data suggests otherwise.”
Source: Testimony, House Committee on Resources
Testified before Sen. John McCain and the Senate Commerce Committee that there wasn’t sufficient evidence of global warming to warrant taking action to reduce emissions.
Source: Transcript, John Christy’s testimony before Senate Commerce Committee 5/17/00
Waynesbro want to try again?
May 8th, 2009 at 9:17 amScience and religion s/b looking for the same thing “truths”. When the press and politics get involved it doesn’t seem to me that there is a healthy debate. When you try to simplify the story there are too many holes “in my mind” that need to be filled in.
Also, there is plenty of room for good debate without attacking somebody for their religious views. I don’t pretend to have the smarts/time/ambition to make useful statements on global warming. However, I can detect when the facts are manipulated for gain. And when argument is cut short by name calling or labeling. If the scientist, politicians, etc. really believed in “global warming” and could make a convincing case, the public WOULD back this. How many of our ancestors have sacrificed much more for what the believed in this country and their communities.
BTW: The below comment is no where near a statement in support of the present “Global Warmingist”. It is basically saying that we have had some effect on the dynamics of the weather (but make not statement of how it could be measured).
It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into irrigated farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the air, and putting extra greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate has not changed in some way.”
John Christy
May 8th, 2009 at 1:31 pmUhhh, no idiot, your personal interpretive skills aside, go back and read.
The quotes I “selectively” provided was the official statement from the AGU statement on global warming confirming mr Christy’s belief that global warming WAS CAUSED BY MAN.
The fact that he differs from other scientists in his views on the severity of the impacts doesn’t change the fact that he’s been an ACTIVE MEMBER of the IPCC working to combat global warming for almost a DECADE now, and it doesn’t change the fact that he BELIEVES in it.
Once more, I blame this on the parents. It’s an illiteracy issue, which is why you don’t understand the question.
We asked for a climatologist who DOESN’T BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING.
You provided one who does.
Care to try again?
May 8th, 2009 at 2:39 pmWhen you can produce a climatologist who DOES NOT BELIEVE in global warming, you let me know troll.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:42 pmMay 8th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I’m telling you guys, ….a strong back is a terrible thing to waste.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:50 pmObviously you have reading comprehension issues. Here I’ll bold this for you to make it easier to read.
“I’ve often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue, that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system. Well, I am one scientist – and there are many – that simply think that is not true.”
Source: John Christy, The Great Global Warming Swindle (Documentary, 2007)
“The factors that influence climate are too numerous to document, much less understand from our present level of ignorance. …The alarmist media reports…become the source of downstream hysteria promoted by those with extreme environmental agendas. Such pronouncements by ideological environmentalists that the globe’s weather is worsening are acutally false.”
Source: John Christy “Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths” CEI, 2002
Now I’ve gotten quotes of his from multiple sources and all you’ve managed is to pull one message statement from one organization that he’s a member and claim that’s his official stance. Please locate more than one source for your position on his views.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:59 pmHow about this. Here’s a video of him giving a lecture where he demonstrates that the temperature in the southeastern US is actually decreasing.
Video
May 8th, 2009 at 3:04 pmYou can post stuff about his particular views on the impact and geographic variations, etc on the subject all day.
It won’t change a thing.
We asked you for a climatologist who does NOT believe in global warming, or that it is caused by man.
You produced one who DOES believe in global warming, and that it was caused by man.
:|
Care to try again?
May 8th, 2009 at 3:10 pmHere is his statement to Congress in February of this year.
“Current climate model projections assume that climate is very sensitive to CO2. We’ve
found however, that during warming episodes, clouds step up their cooling effect. When
model output is tested this way, not one model mimics this cooling effect – in fact the
models’ clouds lead to further warming, not cooling as seen in nature. We hypothesize
that poor cloud properties cause models to overstate warming rates. We’ve also found
that current popular surface temperature datasets indicate more warming than is actually
happening in the atmosphere because they are contaminated by surface development.”
House Ways and Means Commitee
May 8th, 2009 at 3:14 pmAnd the quote you posted, has to do with his views on the IMPACT and SEVERITY of global warming.
Which everyone’s aware of.
We all know Christy’s views on the impact and resulting catastrophic events differs from the overwhelming majority of the scientific community.
But that doesn’t change the fact that he still believes in global warming and that it is caused BY MAN.
So, as I said before genius, when you can produce a climatologist who does NOT believe in global warming or that it was caused by man, you let us know.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:14 pmQuote Christy all day.
But he still believes in global warming and that it was caused by man.
Until you can produce one single climatologist who does NOT believe in global warming, or that it was caused by man, then we’ll continue to laugh at your world class stupidity.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:16 pmPence sounds like a good candidate for the Flat Earth Society.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:17 pmYou incorrectly interpret what his views are. He states that the Earth has warmed, but that the Earth goes through warming and cooling periods and does not equate that to anything man has done. In fact, he’s stated that this is a natural event and started even before man could have had any impact.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:17 pmOh and if you want to get “technical” here we asked not only for a Climatologist who DID NOT believe in global warming but one who also was NOT on the list of BIG OIL SPONSORED organizations.
John Christy’s is a member and works with CEI (Competitive Enterprise Institute), which is sponsored by …..wait for it…..wait for it………EXXON MOBILE.
:|
So not only does he not deny global warming, or that it was caused by man, he is also funded by BIG OIL.
So you fail on both charges there.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:23 pmPerhaps it would be best if you tried a reading comprehension course or something, then revisit the question.
We’re looking for….no waiting for….. a climatologist who does NOT believe in global warming, and who is NOT sponsored by BIG OIL.
:|
Care to try again?
May 8th, 2009 at 3:25 pmWrong. You can’t read.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
So we see that he not only purports global warming is real, he attributes it to “increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.”
lol
May 8th, 2009 at 3:29 pmYou never once stated that the climatologist should not be sponsored by big oil. You just asked for one who doesn’t believe in global warming and Christy doesn’t. Since, you’ve been defeated on this front you’re back peddling and adding additional stipulations.
To help things move along I’ll add another climatologist who’s position it is that man made global warming isn’t happening. That person would be Roy Spencer.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:30 pmSo not only does his own words defy you, he’s affiliated with BIG OIL.
Which removes him from the equation.
It’s a simple request lamebrain.
Just produce a single climatologist, NOT affiliated with BIG OIL and who does NOT believe in global warming.
Hell it’s been FOUR days we’ve been asking.
:|
Even I thought you’d have found one by now.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:31 pmYou keep going back to that one source. A group who released a combined statement. Please, find us some more material the one group statement doesn’t mean that’s his individual position. If that’s the only statement you can find to support your position then I’d say it’s rather weak.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:32 pmlol
Once more, I blame this on parental home schooling.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
The challenge was put out repeatedly.
Sorry you’re too ignorant to read.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:34 pmThat “one statement” was an OFFICIAL PUBLIC STATEMENT he co authored in 2003, and then RE-AFFIRMED in 2007.
It’s an official statement which states clearly that he does believe in global warming and that he does believe it to be caused BY MAN.
That’s all I need.
Not to mention he’s sponsored by BIG OIL when he’s speaking out against the CURRENT SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS on the IMPACT of global warming.
Which removes him from the equation
May 8th, 2009 at 3:37 pmWhen you can produce one single climatologist who agrees with the brain dead throwbacks sponsoring you to be here, you let me know.
In the meantime, I’ll do my captain Kidd, and say “MR CHRISTY!!! WALK THE PLANK”.
:)
Because Mr Christy is removed from the equation on TWO counts.
A. He believes in global warming and its causative factor being man.
B. He’s affiliated with BIG OIL which disqualifies him from the challenge.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:39 pmCome on John “Dough”, dig deep.
Surely after four days one of you can produce at least ONE single solitary climatologist, who doesn’t believe in global warming and who’s not sponsored by big oil.
I mean, with the thousands of members of the AGU and the international committees on global warming, surely there’s SOMEONE out there you can find?
Just one?
You’ve had four days now.
:|
I’m starting to actually feel a little sorry for you.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:43 pm:|
It’s embarrassing.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:45 pmDon’t forget that you made this statement as well.
Now I’ll admit when I’m wrong and I was wrong about you the big oil qualification, but I’ll add this. Christy was awarded two major awards for his study of the climate that contradicts the majority of climate views.
But moving on we have Roy Spencer who says:
In 2006 Spencer criticized Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth saying, “For instance, Mr. Gore claims that the Earth is now warmer than it has been in thousands of years. Yet the latest National Academies of Science (NAS) report on the subject has now admitted that all we really know is that we are warmer now than we were during the last 400 years, which is mostly made up of the ‘Little Ice Age.’”
In an interview with conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh on February 28, 2007, Spencer stated that he doesn’t believe “catastrophic manmade global warming” is occurring. He also criticized climate models, saying “The people that have built the climate models that predict global warming believe they have sufficient physics in those models to predict the future. I believe they don’t. I believe the climate system, the weather as it is today in the real world shows a stability that they do not yet have in those climate models.”
May 8th, 2009 at 3:46 pmLol, contrary to your beliefs I’ve only been in this discussion since yesterday.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:47 pmIlliterate is more like it, but ok.
Wrong is wrong.
And yes….you were WRONG.
:|
On everything so far.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:48 pmOh and I was waiting for “Roy Spencer”.
He’s quite famous.
Him and EXXON MOBILE who sponsors him AND Mr Christy to co author papers denying the impacts of global warming.
:|
Care to try again?
May 8th, 2009 at 3:50 pmAt least I’ll admit when I’m wrong and not divert when someone proves me wrong like you have.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:51 pmIn fact, “ole Roy” is actually a little more evangelically motivated than Christy.
Christy was a better pick from that perspective, being Christy’s more on the “CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK” side, while mr Spencer is a member of the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance.
:|
Didn’t realize “religion” also played a role in denying global warming…..oh wait, that’s right. It does, lol.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:52 pmPlease provide evidence of where Exxon has funded either one of their research and not just used their statements in their propaganda.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:54 pmWhen you admit you’re “wrong” you’ll admit that the overwhelming majority of the independent scientific community believes in global warming, and has stated that.
Over and over and over.
There’s no distraction, except for a handful of “science whores” who’s sold their souls to big oil.
When you can produce a single climatologist, NOT affiliated with BIG OIL, then you can talk.
Until then, admitting you’re wrong on a tiny thing, while lying about major things, does little to elevate your status to anything more than an ignorant right wing troll.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:55 pmI’m not religious and I didn’t know and couldn’t care what their religious views are.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:56 pmSure. Christy filed an AMICUS BRIEF with the US Supreme Court on behalf of the CEI institute, which is sponsored by ….wait for it….wait for it….EXXON MOBILE.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:56 pmMay 8th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Never once have I stated this wasn’t the case. Overwhelming majority doesn’t mean correct either. Nor have I stated what my particular views are.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:58 pmSo did “ole Roy”.
And understand, this is just ONE of the big oil companies working behind these two.
I could go on, and talk about “WESTERN FUEL”, “SHELL OIL”, and all the others and the organizations these men produce their “work” for, but I don’t need to.
Exxon is enough to remove “Mister Christy” and “Ole ROY” from the equation.
When you can produce ONE SINGLE SOLITARY climatologist NOT affiliated with “BIG OIL”, then you can talk.
Until then troll, you’re just an idiot with a keyboard and no where to go.
May 8th, 2009 at 4:00 pmWell, since you’re not a climatologist, or even reasonably literate, your particular “views” are of little concern.
Produce at least ONE climatologist NOT affiliated with BIG OIL, who doesn’t believe in global warming.
The challenge has been up for days now, and all you do is talk talk talk.
Put up troll. Put up or shut up.
May 8th, 2009 at 4:02 pmI’ll be back later to check on you.
:)
Hang in there stoopy.
May 8th, 2009 at 4:03 pmhaha, sounds a lot like the person on the other end of this conversation.
Your literacy has been a little lacking as well and where did you get your climatology degree from?
May 8th, 2009 at 4:14 pmNeither Christy or Spencer are listed as experts or speakers for the CEI. Because they filed one court motion supporting a position does not mean that they are funding them. As far as I can tell most of their funding comes from government research grants so until you can prove where big oil has funded them directly or through one of there shell organizations your claim that they are is false.
May 8th, 2009 at 4:21 pmPlease explain this.
Neither Spencer nor Christy receives any research support or funding from oil, coal or industrial companies or organizations, or from any private or special interest groups. All of their climate research funding comes from state and federal grants or contracts.
Link
May 8th, 2009 at 4:34 pmDr. John Christy, Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center, at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH)….
UAH’s Earth System Science Center is among the nation’s premiere institutions for atmospheric science research. A team of about 70 scientists and technicians conducts important research in remote sensing, global climate change, air pollution monitoring and modeling, weather forecasting, Doppler radar and technology development, and severe weather studies. The center receives about $8 million in research funding each year through the National Weather Service, NOAA, DOE, DOD, DOT, EPA, TVA and NASA.
Link
May 8th, 2009 at 4:40 pmSince Christy is back on the table because I’ve proven he doesn’t work for big oil I’ll give you a statement on his belief in global warming.
When considering information such as indicated above, one finds it
difficult to conclude the climate change is occurring in the US and that it
is exceedingly difficult to conclude that part of that change might have
been caused by human factors.
Link
May 8th, 2009 at 4:48 pmThat’s ONE confirmation of their work with CEI. They also do work for several other well known Big Oil front groups.
In fact they’re both on “Panels” for these groups, including the “INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE”, a CONSERVATIVE “think tank” sponsored for the last 10 years by EXXON MOBILE.
And there’s plenty more.
Of course, the one is enough to remove them from the equation.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:09 pmNow, I’m still waiting for a climatologist who is NOT associated with BIG OIL who DENIES global warming.
:|
And I’ll continue to “check in on you” to be sure you don’t falter in this task.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:11 pmI’ve given you one, but your too stubborn to admit it. *shrugs” Oh well.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:15 pmYou really should learn to read. I’ll repeat this again.
Neither Spencer nor Christy receives any research support or funding from oil, coal or industrial companies or organizations, or from any private or special interest groups. All of their climate research funding comes from state and federal grants or contracts.
If you want the reference link scroll up. Now who’s being a moron?
May 8th, 2009 at 5:17 pmNo. John Christy is on a PANEL for the INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE, and he is LISTED AS A CONTRIBUTING WRITER for CEI.
On their website.
He also helped CEI as did Spencer sue the EPA, representing CEI as an “expert” on the issue.
BOTH CEI and the INDEPENDENT INSTIUTE are conservative think tanks sponsored by Big Oil.
But it doesn’t end there. They’re both tied directly to multiple BIG OIL sponsored groups, like the George C. Marshall Institute, the Heartland Institute and the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance.
All of these groups are conservative groups who are sponsored by BIG OIL.
And there’s more.
But as I said earlier dimwit, the “one” was enough.
Spencer like
May 8th, 2009 at 5:26 pmI don’t need a link dimwit. That reference quotes who PAYS THEM DIRECTLY.
If I work for a group, and that group pays me, but that group is funded by BIG OIL, then I’m a ’sub-contractor’ for BIG OIL.
I asked for climatologists NOT affiliated with BIG OIL and who do NOT believe in Global Warming.
You’ve provided two, BOTH who are tied directly to groups SPONSORED BY BIG OIL and one who doesn’t even deny global warming or its cause by man.
So that would make “you” the moron.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:28 pmWhen you can produce one single climatologist NOT affiliated with Big Oil, you let me know.
It’s only taken you four days and still not one produced, but I’ll give you some more time.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:29 pmMaybe you could go to school and get your degree in climatology while I’m waiting, then keep from tying yourself to big oil, then deny global warming?
:|
It’s tedious I know but at least its a plan.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:31 pmYou make statements without any proof to back them up. This makes one believe you’re just pulling shit out of your ass to make yourself look good, but only makes you look link and uninformed idiot.
You want to make statements like above then provide links to back them up otherwise you’re just an idiot.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:32 pmBy the way moron, your “Roy Spencer”?
He works for the Tech Central Science Foundation.
The foundation receives more than half of its funds from….wait for it….wait for it……EXXON MOBILE.
Per the foundations own website.
So much for “Ole Roy”.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:35 pmYea, I’m just writing these quotes “out of my ass”.
Sure. I invented the US Supreme Court filing, or the fact that according to Exxons own website, in 2003, just months after the Tech Institute was formed, donate 93,000 dollars of their 150,000 dollar operating budget for the year.
Even though you punch the figures into google, or the Amicus brief, or the organizations that I referenced into Google the responses come right back….but I “made it all up”.
Sure asswipe.
If that’s what you have to tell yourself, then hey.
Whatever gets you up the hill.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:42 pmNothing to support this statement. Idiot
May 8th, 2009 at 5:43 pmI just supported it idiot. Exxon donated 93,000 in 2003, which was more than HALF of the organizations operating budget.
And “OLE ROY” is a regular author. In fact, he authors the TCS “DAILY”.
Go check their website. He’s ALL over it.
As are his “TCS DAILY’S”.
Any other bright ideas, dipshit?
May 8th, 2009 at 5:45 pmI believe good science is all about gathering the facts as can be best measured, with the intent of piecing that information together to draw a logical conclusion. Perhaps “conclusion” is a poor choice of words in that in strongly implies that all the work is done and the book is closed on the matter of interest. I think good science never closes the book on anything. I think all must agree having an open mind is essential to working towards the truth. It does not mean that obviously poor interpretations are as good as highly regarded ones. It just means you really can never completely rule them out, as stinky as they maybe.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:50 pmHaving said that, pounding each other to a bloody pulp asserting one ‘s interpretation to be superior to the other is only worthwhile in that the facts of the matter do eventually come out and save lazy people like me from having to look all this stuff up. I’ll draw my conclusion on global warming from what I believe to be the most credible interpretation of the facts. Pence’s interpretation is very poor. I like NASA’s much better. NASA has much better credentials.
Thanks Wayne and Tim. Tim, move on, you’re way over your head.
As I said,…..so much for “OLE ROY”.
ExxonMobil 2003 Worldwide Giving Report
http://www.edf.org/documents/5910_2003.giving_report.pdf
May 8th, 2009 at 5:51 pmOh, look. Sockpuppet number 12’s here to run interference.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:53 pmWhen you can come out from behind the sockpuppets (does anyone expect me to believe that “Painless” here just happened into a thread that’s buried 4 or 5 pages deep, to tell us to stop right at the moment I was proving Roy Spencers direct ties to TCS and EXXON?) and provide what I asked for, i.e. ONE SINGLE Climatologist who does NOT believe in global warming and who is NOT affiliated with BIG OIL, you let me know.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:00 pmSo far, you’ve produced two climatologists.
One who DOES believe in global warming, and BOTH who are tied directly to BIG OIL sponsored anti global warming conservative front groups.
When you can produce ONE, who does NOT believe in global warming, and who is NOT affiliated with BIG OIL, you let me know.
I’ll be waiting right here.
:|
Like I’ve been waiting for 4 days now.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:03 pmRoy being an author does not equate him being a puppet for big oil. Considering all his research funding are public grants. You really are a moron aren’t you?
Quit it with the conspiracy theories you’re just appearing to be more of an idiot than you already do.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:08 pmI’m not the “idiot” who can’t produce a single climatologist not affiliated with Big Oil who doesn’t believe in global warming.
:)
That would be “you”.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:10 pmUgh, you’re about the biggest moron I think I’ve ever run across. You completely ignore facts even when they are presented right in front of you.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:10 pmI have, you just chose to ignore that information.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:11 pmNow, either produce one or I’ll have to “step out” to get on with my Friday.
I will of course be happy to “check in on you” later, to make sure you didn’t blow a head gasket or something if you like.
:|
In fact, it will be my pleasure.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:12 pmLying won’t help you.
I just proved ROY SPENCER works for TCS, which is a self professed “CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK” that is sponsored by EXXON MOBILE.
And John Christy, who also has multiple ties to big oil, has officially stated on the record, that he DOES believe in global warming.
Both are thus removed from the equation.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:14 pmThanks for entertaining me during my work day, but I’m heading home to enjoy my weekend. You may continue and I’ll be back on Monday to see if you could credibly discredit the two climatologists I’ve list, but so far you’ve failed.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:14 pmWrong.
I’ve produced conclusive proof that both Christy and Spencer are tied to BIG OIL.
In fact, BOTH MEN have MULTIPLE ties ON THE RECORD, to several BIG OIL sponsored Conservative groups, including Tech Central Station, CEI Institute, George C. Marshall Institute, Heartland Institute and the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance.
All of these groups are sponsored by EXXON MOBILE (among other big oil groups) which is proven by EXXONS OWN CORPORATE GIVING SHEETS posted online for all too see.
And what’s even funnier, is one of the guys you provided, the first one in fact, John Christy, BELIEVES in global warming AND that man caused it.
Lol.
And I’ll be here to reiterate these facts each time you deny them.
Even if it takes a year.
:|
I’m there for you…troll.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:23 pmWell Wayne, 4 or 5 pages back was all I was interested in. Couldn’t care less what you’re up to now. Chill, have a cookie
May 8th, 2009 at 6:38 pmYea slick?
Well you’re one up on me.
:|
I didn’t care less about what you were “up to” before.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:46 pmJust another big mouth coming into a thread you would have had to dig through pages of threads to find, just to interfere with my debate.
Right at the very moment,….when I produced solid proof that EXXON funded TCS, and Roy Spencer worked for TCS.
:|
What great timing you have.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:47 pmJust as I gave “Unitroll” there the evidence he asked for, proving that he was wrong and that Spencer was nothing more than big oil shill, in you come.
To interfere with my momentum and change the subject from the evidence I produced, to your mealy mouthed inbred whining.
So f#$k off pinhead.
:|
When I want your opinion, I’ll give it to you.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:49 pmAnd “John Dough”? This ones for you.
A quote from your unbiased scientist, “Roy Spencer”.
So now we see, that the scientist Roy Spencer, who not only works for TCS who is funded by BIG OIL, is a NEOCONSERVATIVE who believes in CREATIONISM.
lol
May 8th, 2009 at 6:54 pmHere. Here’s one of mister Spencers “daily’s” over at the Exxon funded neoconservative think tank, TCS.
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=080805I
May 8th, 2009 at 6:56 pmWayne, please accept my apologies, my last comment was rude. Have a nice weekend.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:59 pmIn 2003, more than HALF the operating budget of TCS was provided by EXXON MOBILE, according to public records and EXXON MOBILES 2003 “CORPORATE WORLDWIDE GIVING REPORT”.
Roy Spencer works for TCS and has for many years, writing their “DAILY” which includes neoconservative Evangelical Christian nonsense, about the world, it’s creation and evolution.
Thus we see Roy Spencer, the Climatologist provided by John Dough as a “climatologist who doesn’t believe in global warming and who is NOT affiliated with BIG OIL”, actually works for a far right wing neoconservative “think tank” that is funded by EXXON MOBILE.
Thus removing him from the equation.
So far, John Dough, in spite of all his mindless “nuh uhs” has yet to produce one single solitary climatologist NOT affiliated with BIG OIL, and who does not believe in global warming.
Even though he’s had FOUR DAYS,….to do it.
:|
Go figger.
May 8th, 2009 at 7:02 pm….which is just two days less than one of his scientists, Ole Roy claims the earth took to create.
:|
Beat that with a stick.
May 8th, 2009 at 7:11 pmseslichat
May 11th, 2009 at 12:28 amsesli chat
sesli sohbet
seslisohbet