Don't be a Denier! The Science is In! Global Warming Science Revealed!

The tables are turning, in the global warming debate, the AGW alarmists are denying the new evidence coming forth. They've become the new deniers. This is a little montage I tossed together to express my thoughts and point to some of the science coming to light in the global warming fraud.

Be sure to follow along with the globalist's antics at http://climategate.tv/
http://climatedepot.com/ and http://wattsupwiththat.com/

Don't want to search for info? Download the A-Z Climate Reality Check here: http://cfact.org/pdf/ClimateDepot_A-Z_ClimateRealityCheck.pdf

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• AGW
• Antropogenic
• Global
• Warming
• Climate
• change
• deniers
• skeptics
• science
• cop15
• cop16
• cop17
• cfact.org

[demdanglibruls]

@aquartlow The sad fact of the matter is that you cannot change your mind. It is closed against any conflicting evidence and afraid of policies that might upset the status quo-even if keeping the status quo creates problems. Someone who is so hardened against the evidence will never be convinced- and will spend their days waging war on science.

[demdanglibruls]

@aquartlow "I'm not sure of much", is what you claim on your page. That is completely wrong. You are overconfident and brazenly spew nonsense and ignore most of my comments. You didn't change your viewpoint based on the facts- instead you attempt to change the facts to correspond with your viewpoint. Now you are the good guy, fighting back with "facts" against the evil metrosexual hipsters who plan to take over the world with their "watermelon" agenda. Nothing can dissuade a true believer™.

[aquartlow]

@demdanglibruls "Rick Perry did hide data because it did not conform with his denialist views, George W Bush did hide AGW evidence - apparently unless it comes out of the mouth of a pundit, it cannot be true,"

LOL

First you purport to know Perry's mind (movtives) then you state that Bush hid evidence of your myth. You live in a world of straw arguments and Jonesian corruption. A corruption you deny. Are you now a denier?

[aquartlow]

@demdanglibruls ". I was surprised when I heard about a study that said ..."

You heard.

My, my.......so scientific........."hey a buddy o'mine down at the plant says......"

[ernanimartins]

What a catchy meme that jingle is, in the morning!

[demdanglibruls]

@aquartlow A 61 year old woman typing on a computer, calling people metrosexual socialists? That is a very funny picture in my mind.

[demdanglibruls]

@aquartlow The people who hate NPR are generally wingnuts and moonbats because it demonstrates the falws in being on the fringe. I was surprised when I heard about a study that said that 63% of the experts on NPR stories were conservative, while only 37% were liberal. I always viewed it as being biased to the left. This tentative evidence may indicate it has a conservative bias. Either way, it is a credible source.

[demdanglibruls]

@aquartlow The fact is, it is very easy to quote mine anything. Taking a bunch of quote mined emails from a small research unit and using them to demonstrate that AGW is a massive global socialist conspiracy is preposterous. I just read the article you sent. Among the majority of scientists who accept AGW there is a minor dispute over whether AGW will cause larger and stronger hurricanes. Many scientists reject the idea because the warming seen so far is too small to cause a notable effect.

[demdanglibruls]

@aquartlow What it says is true- Rick Perry did hide data because it did not conform with his denialist views, George W Bush did hide AGW evidence - apparently unless it comes out of the mouth of a pundit, it cannot be true, which is what you are implying. Your odd poetic way of writing comments does little for the debate-you just reuse the same old tactic and create interesting metaphors. The "Final Nail" (this one is at least the tenth) is a common denialist tactic.

[demdanglibruls]

@aquartlow My "excuse making" is explaining to you that I do not automatically wish to know the biases of my sources-most news sites don't pull things out of thin air. I find it amusing that you do not read or choose not to reply to my other comments, and say nonsense like "climategate 2.0 is the final nail in the watermelon" without explaining how it is. Almost all of the emails are rehashed from '09, '07, or '05. NPR is highly credible and doesn't pull things out of thin air.