Eyewitness at Copenhagen - Climategate Facts from Marc Morano

[wimahlers]

In short what scientific data or scientific report do you contest?

What is the science you contest it with?

And who verified (scientifically peer-reviewed) your alternative scientific explanation?

I really like to know! And please can you do it without resorting to the opinonated diatribe of Morano, Monckton and like persons. Try Lindzen. But please present his scientifically peer-reviewed paper. That is, I am not interested in any person but in solid scientific verifiable arguments.

[wimahlers]

I also wonder why AGW deniers have such a morbid fascination for Al Gore. There are actually people following Al Gore all the time pestering him with the most gullible and obnoxious questions. Why? Stalking groupies? I sincerely hope you are not one of them. I sincerely hope you back every assertion with actual science. Doing so would separate you, in a positive sense, from Tim Ball, Fred Singer and ilk. So, again, be careful with your sources. Make sure you check them before publishing.

[paolotagliano]

@wimahlers because he tried to decieve them and take their money, take their jobs and give them to companies he has stakes in which produce much more pollution.

[wimahlers]

Wow! The end of climate change!

But no! The scientific consensus is still there.

The e-mails contain no fraud when viewed in their scientific context.

Marc Morano would have been wiser to withhold a conclusion before it is confirmed.

And who cares what individuals say about the weather one time or the other, Obama on a blizzard or whatever ... that is a straw man argument.

[TheBullionBull]

@wimahlers "But no! The scientific consensus is still there."

HAHAHA - that is like saying the Keynesian economic consensus still exists amongst academics. Of course the government funded institutions say what the government wants to hear. That is like saying "look, all the top political scientists in the Soviet Union agree that communism is good!" Common sense shows us that "global warming" is a scam to get us to pay carbon taxes to the international banks.

[wimahlers]

@TheBullionBull,

.

name a single accredited scientific university or other accredited scientific organization i the world that supports even one assertion against the scientifically accepted anthropogenic global warming consensus.

You can't! Governmental or otherwise.

As you are also unable to present an alternative explanation for the CURRENT global warming, the CURRENT melting of the glacier fields and artic ice cap and the exceptional amount of snow on the east south pole.

[wimahlers]

@TheBullionBull The "Common sense" excuse never was nor wil it ever be a scientific argument.

Also, "common sense" is often proved wrong by science.

AGW is proved to be a fact by all measurements from different scientific disciplines. from space, ice core drills, flora and fauna migration patterns, atmospheric and oceanic temperature measurements. There also is direct measurement of the ever increasing air and sea CO2 concentration from the burning of fossil fuels. Etc .All facts denied by you

[TheBullionBull]

@wimahlers "Scientists" are often proven wrong by reality, too. There was scientific "consensus" that the sun revolved around the earth. You cannot extrapolate a 100 year period where temperatures are up by about 1 degree and then say that man is destroying the world. Small changes like that can happen all the time based on solar activity and many other factors much larger than a few small combustion engines. Compared to natural CO2, man-made CO2 is almost nothing.

[wimahlers]

@TheBullionBull Oh my god ... are we back to the middle age arguments again? The time before the internet. satellites, science, the scientific method, all modern measuring equipment?

How do you justify your opinion that they are wrong now? What do you do with the following facts?

The artic ice is decreasing in volume. So is the glacier ice. All with a speed not seen by modern science for the past 650.000 years. What is your explanation? All this knowing the physical properties of CO2.

[lapsatus]

@wimahlers The Medieval Warm Period is uncontroversial; every progressive, public university teaches it matter of factly. My university (OSU) taught me about it in a Med. Studies course; you can't understand Medieval history otherwise.

1) Modern science can learn Med. temperatures from extant evidence; the Med. inability to do so is irrelevant.

2) History tells us that clergy began wearing warmer clothes, agriculture crashed, rain, famine and plague grew, because Med. Warm Period ended.

[wimahlers]

@lapsatus Continued...

The medieval history you talk about is the European medieval history. This history, in any shape or form, does not invalidate AGW or proves that the MWP was continuous, global and/or as warm or warmer than the current global warming. However, that is what you suggest. And even if true, which given current studies isn't (see references in: tinyurl*com/6kw6gqy), it still does not invalidate the current consensus of AGW.

[wimahlers]

@TheBullionBull, . "Compared to natural CO2, man-made CO2 is almost nothing." . So you claim! But can you back your claim? You can't! I know you can't because I know the verified scientific facts. I strongly suggest you verify your sources. I can back my claims. To start, here is a reference with references: tinyurl(dot)com/6zhzrlu Try to find one scientific institute in the world that denies or questions any of the discussed data herein. I bet you won't find any!

[MrHr1207]

@bobhawks oh yah , just go pay your carbon tax to the rothschild to save the planet . you idiot ! man you people are dumb. tell me ohh smart one. how much co2 is released from a volcanic eruption? or a forest fire? can you say more than man makes! yes you dribbling fool. have you ever looked into the planets history and the cycles of the sun? the tilt of the earth? post glazier rebound? many things effect weather.

[MrHr1207]

@bobhawks thats funny lord mockton has asked plenty of times for debate ,yet none came to call, you are a brainwashed fool

[wimahlers]

@MrHr1207,

.

"thats funny lord mockton has asked plenty of times for debate"

.

Monckton is not worth debating. He has nothing to say. That is, he says a lot and has a slick slide presentation, but all of that has zero scientific value. As proven by the fact that Monckton can not name a single accredited scientific university or other accredited scientific organization that supports even one of his assertions against the scientifically accepted anthropogenic global warming consensus.

[MrHr1207]

@wimahlers believe all the lies you want! while your at it .tell me how taxing people helps your pipe dream

[comedytracker]

It has come to my attention that we are receiving an asian, muslim and black influx with the intention to destroy White America.

Don't be fooled. This is happening all over the world, including the white origin, the UK, which signed a treaty to let muslims overrun the country without being assimilated.

We must act swiftly to protect our future. Have more kids, support the White American Race.

[CBound]

Once again, this has been a great conversation/interview.

[kennyvii]

Thank you, that was excellent. All your programs are excellent. I am always happy when a new installment comes up on YouTube.