Denny ron, well spoken, my Man!!!!


ron In the forum here is a linked peer-reviewed article that has been published showing that the AGW models were erroneous and why that judgement was made. I'm not going to link it. Those who think we are lying about peer-reviewed articles refuting the IPCC AGW theory will just have to look for it, like we did. If you've got the cajones to do so. If not, you (in general) really can't comment on it. Just popping into the chatbox to say "phooey on you" doesn't count as evidence or scientific refutation. Put your money where your mouth is, so to speak.


Denny Anonymous, I found a better one that crosses 5,000 yrs..




Denny Anonymous 17:25, how's this?



Hope this helps!


Anonymous Does anyone know of a good graph showing a comparison of temperatures during the Medieval Climate Optimum, the Little Ice Age, and today?
Thanks!


Anonymous Global warming is a political agenda..another scare tactic like war on terror..

ooh..the world is gonna end as said by rothschilds, price of england, politicians the 3 types we trust the most


SFM I feel your frustration Ron. Only the incredibly naive believe that the government is made up of noble caring honest people. The truth is that most of them are power freaks and professional liars. Why would someone spend millions of their own money to get a job paying 180 thousand a year. Is it that they are so wanting to help their fellow man or to enrich themselves through corruption. I have to laugh when I hear them speak about corrupt officials and elections in other countries. They are no better and they call themselves "public servants" What a total load of BS. You will never convince the bark humpers Ron but its not because of a lack of evidence.


ron As one notable democrat said, cap-n-trade will be the greatest revenue collection scheme of our time for the government and the wall street elite. That's the whole reason for this bill. I've explained until I am out of breath how lousy windmills and solar panels are at this time in history. It doesn't matter. I've explained how CO2 does not create the warming people think it does. All that is left is the desire of some in the government to raise government revenues.


ron

Here's one for you, Pat. This one guy thinks that most conservatives live in the areas that will be flooded by AGW, leaving the rest of the country mostly liberal.


ron So, CBS was trying to appeal to emotions rather than rational thought. Which means we may need to suspect that they don't always tell the plain truth.


ron That is equally true, as well, Pat.


Patrick G. The study is a little silly. Dogs put most of their carbon back into the soil... An SUV does not. I did like the suggestion of eating your dog added by the blogger for dramatic effect.

Always more effective if you tug at emotional strings...

Of course - triggering emotional responses to an extent shuts off the part of the brain that thinks rationally.


ron

A linked article that states that the carbon footprint for caring for a dog is even greater than owning an SUV. There's people that acutally believe this. So, I'll go ahead and make it clear. If someone were to try and take my dog away to "save the environment," that person would be carried away in a body bag. I mean, it really is getting stupid, folks. This cap-and-trade is essentially a breathing tax and is simply a means to control every aspect of your life. I can't hardly wait for 2012, if we are still allowed to vote, then.



ron But I do have moments of naivete. I keep thinking one of you endless "Anonymous" posters will actually have some science to bring to this discussion and I am sorely dissapointed each time. You think I would learn from the first two dozen times. Evidently, not. All I ever see is recycled rhetoric surrounding thoroughly disproven theories and models and a clinging to the tenets of the First Church of the IPCC, as represented by St. Gore. It's as if some people could stand outside getting a sunburn and insist the sun is not shining.


ron I can and have been disproving the AGW theory and I belong to no such think tank. In fact, I am an electrical trade instructor, formerly a working electrician, living paycheck to paycheck. I would dearly love if someone would pay me well to say what I say. But that doesn't happen. And everyone we've ever quoted or cited on here is in the same boat. They are not "funded" by conservative think tanks or oil conglomerates. So, the article you quoted is full of self-serving lies, chief among them, the veracity given to the White House report. For goodness sake, a politician is not a scientist. First off, politicians lie as surely as the Earth turns. The whole point of the Constitution was to have limited trust and power in the government.


ron Bless you, Anon 12:38, for speaking your anonymous mind. Now, for the spanking. The article you quoted is nothing but rhetoric, not a single lick of scientific evidence or principle to uphold CO2 AGW or disprove the skeptics. In fact, it was all attempted name-calling of skeptics, in some attempt to link it to conservative political parties, as well as the ever-present unproven assumption that anything written that is skeptical of the AGW theory is funded by a conservative think-tank.



SFM I see where reverand Gore has now admitted that co2 was greatly exaggerated as a cause for global warming. He now says its only 40% of his previous set in stone settled undisputed gospel. The new culprit is soot and methane.......for now. What a joke.


Denny ron, this is no joke!




Denny Right!!! Anonymous! Jean Williams agrees with "Consensus in Science" also....It all comes down to this Anonymous & Jon, Does CO2 cause ALL of the temperature increase in AGW? Waiting for your answer!


Anonymous I agree Jon,

here a link for everyone in that ignores REAL science




Jon Sometimes it simply has to be to late for people to realize when they're wrong.


ron Actually, Pat G, you are quite accurate. OK gets more than TX, though a number of them have started in TX and sidewind across the Red River. And yes, in Texas, storm shelters for the longest time were not necessary to property development. And yes, that is a downfall of Texas. Modernly, homes are having a safe room built in, a few have a shelter underneath or near the house. Some old houses do have a storm shelter in the back yard. But it was voluntary, not required.


Patrick G. ron - "I live in north Texas, the bottom of the heart of Tornado Alley."

I moved to TX about a decade ago. It seems to me that Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa get more tornados. I realize that likely due to its size Texas actually has more, but when I lived in Nebraska it seemed like we had them much more frequently.

Most homes built in North Texas don't even have basements... Virtually every home I've seen in Nebraska/Kansas does. If tornados were more common here (in TX) I don't know why they aren't planned for better.


ron Denny, the US Chamber of Commerce has not fli-pped their stance. Some smart alecks did pull a prank and pass themselves off as USS CoC but the real group remains firm in waiting for a court case to try the AGW theory on it's own merits.



Donny Yeah sure thing, and make sure to tell me if things are wrong.

Login Name:
Email Address:
Please only submit original articles for submission. You can 'blog' about someone else's article but 80% needs to be original with the rest of it quoted and attributed as to where it came from. This is a U.S. Copyrights requirement. Thanks!
Category:	MiscCorrecting GoreReal SciencePonder the MaunderEditorialsScientists for TruthFunny Stuff!
Subject:
News Item: