Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38:145]

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Filthy McNasty said:

I have no subscription, yet when I click on this link:Scientists in cover-up of I am magically taken to the story. Here let me help you some more, here is a screencap of the page you and others just can't get your browsers to open. You might notice that in the top right hand corner there is a "login" option which someone with a subscription could, I suppose, click on and use. Of course you don't need to. But then you did think this was also a WND story. You spent so much time babbling about them you keep failing to address, much less operate your internet browser proficiently enough to look at, the actual story. Just checked and this is one of the "hottest trending" links on the interwebz today. Seems the rest of the world is not having "browser issues" today. Just some DP members. Imagine that.:screwy
View attachment 67166617

Click to expand...

Your link goes to a site requiring a subscription, and your attachment ius invalid. Maybe you should spend less time insulting others.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

rocket88 said:

Which one of us is taking an emotion and equating it with fact?

Click to expand...

Where is the WND article factually wrong? You made the claim... so back it up rocket.

BTW... You're looking the idiot playing this game. So to stop looking the idiot, point out where WND is factually wrong. According to you and Redress and Joe Steel... this should be easy. So have at it.

Here is the link to the article: New global-warming skeptic fears for ‘safety’

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

zimmer said:

Where is the WND article factually wrong? You made the claim... so back it up rocket.

BTW... You're looking the idiot playing this game. So to stop looking the idiot, point out where WND is factually wrong. According to you and Redress and Joe Steel... this should be easy. So have at it.

Here is the link to the article: New global-warming skeptic fears for ‘safety’

Click to expand...

I did not make any claims about the article. I pointed out that WND is a birther website and not reliable. Please stop making things up.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Redress said:

I pointed out that WND is a birther website and not reliable. Please stop making things up.

Click to expand...

zimmer said:

Where is the WND article factually wrong? You made the claim... so back it up rocket.

BTW... You're looking the idiot playing this game. So to stop looking the idiot, point out where WND is factually wrong. According to you and Redress and Joe Steel... this should be easy. So have at it.

Here is the link to the article: New global-warming skeptic fears for ‘safety’

Click to expand...

I stand by my statement.

Tell me Redress... what does "WND is... not reliable" mean in Liberalspeak?

Once again, I stand by my statement. Care to cry again?

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

zimmer said:

I stand by my statement.

Tell me Redress... what does "WND is... not reliable" mean in Liberalspeak?

Once again, I stand by my statement. Care to cry again?

Click to expand...

Any website that pusher birther or truther nonsense is not to be trusted. Why is this confusing?

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Redress said:

Any website that pusher birther or truther nonsense is not to be trusted. Why is this confusing?

Click to expand...

Well why the hell are you crying about being included with rocket and Joe Steel?

As you believe the WND are not reliable, why not skim the article and illustrate what you mean? You won't because you can't, and try to hide your narrowmindedness behind flippant statements.

Why not try to finally add something substantive to a debate? Give it a go.

And...

WND was a 911 truther pusher? Really? Quite the opposite. Truthers are a Leftist thang. You know... dimwits who thought Bush did it.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Joe Steel said:

The linked article isn't available to non-subscribers. It's useless.

Click to expand...

Maybe this link will work for you, Joe...

McCarthyism in Climatology

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

I thought this thread was about a bona fide climate scientist being threatened for her dissent...Seems like those attacking a source have already conceded the debate.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Redress said:

I did not make any claims about the article. I pointed out that WND is a birther website and not reliable. Please stop making things up.

Click to expand...

Ad hominem is ad hominem even if you never actually address the material presented. In fact, it's the purest, uncut form of ad hominem.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

US Conservative said:

The only thing thats useless are the warmist astrologists screaming that the sky is falling.

Click to expand...

That's a low one.....

You need to apologize to astrologers immediately....what they do is honest science, what warmists do is worship a god of greed driven lies.

No scientist today can get grant money unless it is about the end of the earth. Only the most dire issues get funding. So, if I have "results" that say we will evaporate the world's water supply by, say, 2025 I will get more panic grant money than the guy saying, "oh we're pretty sure Monkeys in the Amazon will be a lot more uncomfortable in 2025..." which is probably closer to the truth.

What is surprising is that it's been happening since the early 80's when Maggie Thatcher funded the first research to drive a wedge into the coal miner's union and thier serial strikes; surprising that even responsible media have ignored this pogrom of intellect, and then warmist priests insist it isn't happening.

You really can fool all of the people all of the time

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Redress said:

Any website that pusher birther or truther nonsense is not to be trusted. Why is this confusing?

Click to expand...

I am astonished that once again you attack the source rather than the topic and blather about "birther" nonsense.

Is there any site that has an opinion different than yours that you are not convinced is garbage before having read it?

And it is not unnoticed that you do not even try to claim that scientists are not being muzzled, only offer a topic shifting distraction and straw men.

Now you post "it's not a straw man....." and attack me or something else.....

You realize how boring that is, and how it proves to so many that warmists are full of ****?

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Fearandloathing said:

I am astonished that once again you attack the source rather than the topic and blather about "birther" nonsense.

Is there any site that has an opinion different than yours that you are not convinced is garbage before having read it?

And it is not unnoticed that you do not even try to claim that scientists are not being muzzled, only offer a topic shifting distraction and straw men.

Now you post "it's not a straw man....." and attack me or something else.....

You realize how boring that is, and how it proves to so many that warmists are full of ****?

Click to expand...

I actually read quite a bit I disagree with, just not birther and truther sites. Care to try again?

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Fearandloathing said:

That's a low one.....

You need to apologize to astrologers immediately....what they do is honest science, what warmists do is worship a god of greed driven lies.

No scientist today can get grant money unless it is about the end of the earth. Only the most dire issues get funding. So, if I have "results" that say we will evaporate the world's water supply by, say, 2025 I will get more panic grant money than the guy saying, "oh we're pretty sure Monkeys in the Amazon will be a lot more uncomfortable in 2025..." which is probably closer to the truth.

What is surprising is that it's been happening since the early 80's when Maggie Thatcher funded the first research to drive a wedge into the coal miner's union and thier serial strikes; surprising that even responsible media have ignored this pogrom of intellect, and then warmist priests insist it isn't happening.

You really can fool all of the people all of the time

Click to expand...

I hope the rising college freshman of 2009 took my advice.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

It's -70 degrees in Antarctica, and the ice is melting? Exactly what science says that ice melts when it's 100 degrees below freezing?

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Redress said:

I actually read quite a bit I disagree with, just not birther and truther sites. Care to try again?

Click to expand...

:lamo "well read" is strangely enough not how I would describe you...but eh, reading is one thing, comprehending another I guess :shrug:

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

The German said:

So you know how to interpret climate studies? Where did you gain that knowlege? From observing flies in a swamp?


lol

A man talks as if he knows science. A theory, is established when it shows to be valid in field testing, it is deiscredited whn field testing brings different results. That is science!

You probably dont even know the term used to describe what the scientific method is, you probably never heard of Karl Popper, you probably dont even know what peer review is.

And even more likely, you are one of those people who believes that we are the result of 6000 years of incest by a man and a woman created out of the mans ribb.



What is a warminst? Did you dream that up, or your preacher?

Evidence is available in abundance.

I know more about science than something like you could ever dream to know. Once you figure out how gravity works, you can come back, and I might feel kind enought to explain the barry field to you!

You are speaking to an aspiring scientist in the field of statistical maths, who comes from a family of scientists!!!!!

Someone like me is in no need of lecture on science by some swamp people!

Click to expand...

Dear German avatar was Poppers The Open Society and Its Enemies for some time did you miss that?

I wonder if you a Plato fan? The science can't be wrong, can it? And by wrong, I mean like when warmists skew data and disregard the fact that the data they found does not match even their own hypothesis. Perhaps in the Rhineland that has a different logical conclusion.

We do indeed know of Adams ribb here, but we call it Das Rib.

A warmist are those people who still preach the end of days from the global warming/cooling/climate change that they can't seem to accurately understand. And yet they want changes nearly every aspect of the economy for this. Some of them are scientists who want more funding, those are who these scientists pray to.

You probably dont even know that this is bad science. Maybe in the Ruhr, it it good science? Later, I would like to obtain your autograph if at all possible, herr scientist. Hard science will set us free.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Fearandloathing said:

I am astonished that once again you attack the source rather than the topic and blather about "birther" nonsense.

Is there any site that has an opinion different than yours that you are not convinced is garbage before having read it?

And it is not unnoticed that you do not even try to claim that scientists are not being muzzled, only offer a topic shifting distraction and straw men.

Now you post "it's not a straw man....." and attack me or something else.....

You realize how boring that is, and how it proves to so many that warmists are full of ****?

Click to expand...

For some reason the left thinks that logical fallacy ad hominem (attacking the source / poisoning the well ) should be considered debate instead of a logical foul that should be too embarrassing a thing to do.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Fearandloathing said:

I am astonished that once again you attack the source rather than the topic and blather about "birther" nonsense.

Click to expand...

That sort of deflection seems to be pretty much all she is capable of.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Redress said:

I actually read quite a bit I disagree with, just not birther and truther sites. Care to try again?

Click to expand...

If WND is so disreputable, why not go through their article and apply your "knowledge" and illustrate to the class how... wrong they are.

Have a go... rocket88 has gone scurrying into the bushes after being offered the challenge... how about you giving it a shot? Or do you fear they are correct up and down the line on this one, and that might destroy your world? That it's better to bitterly cling to lame defenses for a narrow mind?

Here is the link: New global-warming skeptic fears for ‘safety’

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

zimmer said:

ROTFLOL... There was no need to answer, as I had taken down you shorts in front of the class and giving you a cyber spanking for all to see.

Click to expand...

By posting useless links?

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

Joe Steel said:

By posting useless links?

Click to expand...

Joe, I haven't had the pleasure of your prattle before. It's as useless as chasing a squirrel around the yard with a tennis raquet.

Let's summarize how this has gone up to this point... shall we?

1. There was enough in the OP to make the point needed. It followed DP rules.

2. The OP was followed by another story related directly to the OP. Your narrow mind did not like the source.

3. There is google. Familiar with it?

4. I googled three related stories and posted them later on.

5. After all this, you have the gall to post... QUOTE=Joe Steel;1063287068]By posting useless links?[/QUOTE]

SUMMARY
Yes Joe, nice cap you've got on... work here long? Cool... well Joe... I'll have 2 cheesburgers, a large coke, a side of fries with mayo (it's a thing I picked up in Europe).

What's the moral of the story? Turn on, tune in, drop out... Timothy Leary was wrong. Not good Joe... not good.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

I tend to reserve judgement on this topic, mainly because I haven't bothered to look into it enough to know one way or another who is probably right.

Which of course means I tend to believe the "it's not that big a deal" crowd, I suppose....or I WOULD be looking into it.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

You are MIA... I was expecting your WND dissection. Seems you have no complaints about what they have written.

Here is the piece: http://www.wnd.com/2014/05/new-global-warming-skeptic-fears-for-safety/

rocket88 said:

As I said, fear is an emotion which cannot be proved or disproved. Al Gore has nothing to do with this guy's feelings.

Click to expand...

rocket88 said:

Fear is an emotion. You can't disprove an emotion. There are no facts put forth as to why he would feel that way, therefore it is his emotion and not provable nor disprovable.

Click to expand...

"There are no facts put forth as to why he would feel that way..." ???

Sure there are, and he tells people what they are. He goes on to claim these supposed "scientists" are McCarthy-like. No small swat across the chops of some supposed "scientists".

Norman Rockwell once painted series called The Four Freedoms. It was based on words from the Libs Super Hero Franklin Roosevelt.

What were the Libs Super Hero's Four Freedoms???

1. The Freedom of Speech.

2. The Freedom of Worship.

3. The Freedom from Want.

4. The Freedom from Fear.

But when it comes to the Grüne Armee Faktion, und protekting zee Religion ov glohball varmingk... fear is just a figment of someone's imagination.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

zimmer said:

Why is this not surprising?

These Religion of Enviromaniacism's gatekeepers and so many of their ardent followers remaind me of the jackals in The Omen. Rabid in their defense of their faith and savior.

Click to expand...

Yep, I read all about that yesterday.

Yet the AGW nuts actually believe there is any room for debate on this issue and they believe there is no AGENDA being pushed.

And these clowns are considered scientists???

There is a big difference between science (scientific method) and rejecting all evidence that doesn't fit or contradicts ones preconceived theory or better yet agenda.

It's difficult to believe anyone buys this AGW bull****....

These quacks have been manipulating data or outright accepting data that disproves their theory that man is responsible for "climate change." It's ****ing ridiculous considering when these quacks only accept evidence that man is responsible they may as well deny that the climate has ever changed, that or "climate change" is somehow bad when it is anything but bad - it's natural.

These ****ing idiots have taken a perfect natural process and blamed humans for it - I cant think of a better way to globally redistribute, destroy capitalist economies and create a more authoritarian or even totalitarian nation or try to grow a global government.

The best part is these authoritarian quacks have absolutely ZERO evidence to even support their claims - all they have is 150 years or weather data and corrupted ice cores with contaminated isotopes. The best part is they can only go back - at the very most 800,000 years when the earth is 4.5 billion years old and has supported life for the last 3.5 billion years.

These climatologists either have an agenda (which they do because the government gives them grants to spew the AGW lie) or they are just epically stupid activists who hate humans...

The real science proves that warming and cooling are the result of solar activity - which of course is fact and common sense.

Re: Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view[W:38]

zimmer said:

Joe, I haven't had the pleasure of your prattle before. It's as useless as chasing a squirrel around the yard with a tennis raquet.

Let's summarize how this has gone up to this point... shall we?

1. There was enough in the OP to make the point needed. It followed DP rules.

2. The OP was followed by another story related directly to the OP. Your narrow mind did not like the source.

3. There is google. Familiar with it?

4. I googled three related stories and posted them later on.

5. After all this, you have the gall to post...

Joe Steel said:

By posting useless links?

Click to expand...

SUMMARY
Yes Joe, nice cap you've got on... work here long? Cool... well Joe... I'll have 2 cheesburgers, a large coke, a side of fries with mayo (it's a thing I picked up in Europe).

What's the moral of the story? Turn on, tune in, drop out... Timothy Leary was wrong. Not good Joe... not good.

Click to expand...

Your story is just so much "prattle." Let me summarize. You posted a comment and a link to support the comment. I tried to read the linked article but found I couldn't because I had to be a subscriber. That made the link useless to me.

Why didn't you use Google to find a usable article to support your story? It would have made your comment about this being a place for real debate more credible because I would have been able to evaluate you comment in context. Instead, you made yourself look like just another copy and paste troll.