Gordon Brown Calls GW Skeptics "Flat Earthers, Anti-Science"; Philip Stott Responds

[MegaPostman77]

Gordon Brown knows bugger all about Science. If scientists told him pigs were causing global warming, he would more than likely believe it. What a dickhead! Never trust authority or politicans!. Wise advice any day of the week!

[dwolfcoach]

WTF, 95% of scientists believed in eugenics? What kind of propaganda move was that? UGHHHH!

[ToxicTeapot]

Global warming is simply promoted by Government because it is a great money making tool.

[thebestsumoeva]

@ToxicTeapot If it was a money making tool it wouldn't be so bad, in reality it's a great power grabbing tool. They now think they can tell us what temperature our houses may be, what kind of light bulbs we can use, how to get to work, how much food we can have, where we can live, how much we can spend, and soon they will be telling us how much fun we can have. This is nothing short of replacing freedom with a compulsory government that thinks it knows more than we do.

[ToxicTeapot]

@thebestsumoeva Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself :)

[nosequiters]

i think i can add too this debate by saying the blue painted girl has nice tits

[tapefilms]

scientist should run the world, like not just one scientist or a group of scientists but if all scientists came together and made an agreement about things and the way that they should be run and they were in charge im sure the world would be a much better place

[LordVigeous666999]

I disagree slightly. Not scientists, engineers

They can understand science, data, numbers. And are far more practical and level headed than a lot of scientists

Because scientists may learn things

But engineers have to apply it

[andy765gtr]

@tapefilms, they would save mankind from its 'success' (which is its failure in the end). environmentalists and biologists ie the relevant scientists, would insist that our population was controlled artificially before nature does it more drastically. politicians will never take take that ultimate taboo on, or even understand engineers would just cause problems with more 'problem solving'; running away from the real problem needing fixing. i suppose it wouldnt pay them to do otherwise

[BriansVideoHobby]

@tapefilms Yes, we could all eat genetically altered plants and animals laced with powerful hormones and pesticides. Sounds like a utopia. You must be very young. You do realize that it is science that brought us fossil fuels on a massive scale? That they failed to predict what the effect would be of burning those fuels?

[tapefilms]

@BriansVideoHobby and its also scientist that are trying to find cleaner energy sources today and all of the medicines that we know today and lots of other very useful things, all governments care about is money, they dont actually look at statistics and see what would be better for the people and try to figure out better ways of running the world, they just tell us that they are right and anyone else is wrong

[andy765gtr]

either the climate change deniers or physics is wrong. and lets face it, physics has a rather better track record of accuracy compared to some of the less accurate denier actions *cough* climategate. im not sure whether stott is actually mental, but he definitely has some rather simplistic beliefs, like that of a grand technological future where economic and population growth can magically perpetuate indefinitely, and without us changing our ways very much. what a dreamer.

[LordVigeous666999]

most deniers don't deny physics, in fact they are the side that insists physics is correct

Example, hot moves toward cold. So, the intensity of storms is determined by the temp diff between equator(hot) and the poles(cold)

During this warming period, the poles have warmed faster than the equator, which, by definition means storms will be less intense. So why do global warming people insist on the opposite?

You'll learn a lot more science from deniers than proponents

search Richard Lindzen

[andy765gtr]

@LordVigeous666999 "most deniers don't deny physics"

bollocks, lindzen is a more sophisticated denialist, but still fully debunked. but MOST deniers are not so sophisticated. firstly, they deny the physics of c02 and simple cause and effect. when they realize they are on to a loser with that one, and look ridiculous they IGNORE that problem to deny something else in the denialist chain of thinking, never admitting they are wrong about the no1 issue (physics).

so your assertion is wrong.

[LordVigeous666999]

Which well known denier, has denied the physics of CO2?

They all agree that CO2 is a green house gas, that humans have added it, and if it is added to the atmo, it will cause SOME warming. Operative word being, SOME

Deniers say, CO2's ability to reduce heat flux can be measured, and observed, and will cause at most .5-.7 degrees C of warming from a doubling. And I don't know of anyone who thinks that is dangerous

What deniers dispute, is the feedbacks, and I believe they do so correctly

[LordVigeous666999]

And as far as lindzen, don't just say, "he is debunked". On what? By who?

I mean, I could go around saying, "The IPCC is debunked", but it wouldn't mean a thing until I bring up specifics

So, lets get specific

[andy765gtr]

this lindzens scientific arguments are so good why hasnt he convinced the scientific community. monkton, stot, lawson, lindzen et al are all the same, whatever the stage theyve reached in the denialist chain of bullshite, they resort to direct appeals to the public and policy makers rather than the actual science community. they are adept at moving the goalposts

monkton, the most famous denier of all, does or has, strenuously denied c02 is a greenhouse gas.

[idnumber101]

one eyed unelected cunt!!!!!

[doodydude234]

I like her jugs.