Scientists struggle to explain lack of global warming

Instead of actually studying the results and seeing where it leads, scientists and politicians have been caught wondering how they can explain away the recent lack of global warming. They are choosing to play to an agenda rather than report the truth- how long will the global warming charade last??

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

“There’s a new report coming out next week,” Stu explained, “This is the new UN IPCC report, which is supposed to be, you know, the Bible of global warming and it’s the thing that Al Gore praises all the time. Well, apparently they’re noticing some of these scientific revelations, that the old projections don’t exactly work.”

What revelations? Stu explained that there has been almost none of the drastic global warming predicted by people like Al Gore.

The Daily Mail reported on the IPCC study:

A leaked copy of the world’s most authoritative climate study reveals scientific forecasts of imminent doom were drastically wrong.

The Mail on Sunday has obtained the final draft of a report to be published later this month by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the ultimate watchdog whose massive, six-yearly ‘assessments’ are accepted by environmentalists, politicians and experts as the gospel of climate science.

They are cited worldwide to justify swingeing fossil fuel taxes and subsidies for ‘renewable’ energy.

Yet the leaked report makes the extraordinary concession that over the past 15 years, recorded world temperatures have increased at only a quarter of the rate of IPCC claimed when it published its last assessment in 2007.

“How many times do we have to look at these guys and have them get something wrong and tell us that even though we were right back then, you’re wrong now and again you’re a holocaust denier.  You’re a flat earther if you say that.  I mean, I don’t know how many times we can possibly be expected to go back to these same people, the same people, in many cases the same names, the same individuals who were telling us we were going through an ice age in the Seventies and Eighties and now we’re supposed to expect the exact opposite, even though their evidence isn’t playing out.  How long can this go on,” Stu said.

  • http://www.artinphoenix.com/gallery/grimm snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

    They cannot explain it for one simple reason: the data they use is fabricated, and the earths atmospheric system is so dynamic that no one can completely understand it.

  • http://www.artinphoenix.com/gallery/grimm snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

    Global warming is a farcical fabrication, it uses contrived data and bribed scientists; typical moves of the UN and the leftists.

  • Anonymous

    Of course they’re struggling … they’ve been lying through their teeth!!!!! Some of these same so-called scientist were saying in the ’70′s that we were coming into the next ‘ice age’!!!!!!!!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    You mean it is getting colder instead of hotter and they want to change the facts so they can rewrite data in order to make it look like the earth is warming. And liberals wonder why we don’t trust these morons. It is funny that astronomers and physicists both can point to other things outside of the earth that helps with earth warming and in this case cooling but climate bigots dismisses their finding to much wonder of astronomers and physicists who most believe the CO2 lie but also believe factors like the sun also warm the earth. Which leads me to believe climate bigots are mixing politics and science which never ends good just ask Jews who where gassed because of the same damn thing happening.

  • Anonymous

    Wait a minute. Are you trying to tell me that the climate can change?  How long has this been going on? Always! You’ve got to be kidding. We need the climate to be perfect always so we have to get to the bottom of this. By the way, does anyone know what the perfect climate is so that we can be sure when we set the climate controls?

  • James Morrison

     ”"How long can this go on,” Stu said.”Until Hell freezes over, my friend…..;-)

  • Anonymous

    Money scam control the uninformed.
    60% more ice this year if they don’t do something in the next decade our toilets will freeze.

  • Anonymous

    How soon we forget!  Maybe Glenn Beck needs to give a history lesson on this subject, too, so you all know where the whole global warming scam came from in the first place.  
    Here’s the condensed version of Carbon Demonization for Beginners:  Carbon demonization was the brain-child of British conservative, Maggie Thatcher.  She used the demonization of carbon to destroy the British coal miners’ union — so the union couldn’t bring down her government, as it did her conservative predecessor’s.  She also used the demonization of coal in order to do an end-run around the environmentalists — so she could push nuclear power over the objections of both the environmentalists and the citizenry who had rejected the idea of nuclear power plants as too dangerous due to their toxic waste.  Maggie gave the world the Hadley Center for Climate Research and Prediction — from whence all the evil anti-carbon propaganda flowed.  Maggie Thatcher also talked Ronald Reagan into going against the US Constitution (and the will of We, the People) to begin to globalize the US and the systematic off-shoring of our jobs.  How’s that worked out for the American manufacturing workers or our economy?  Now all we are left with are crappy service jobs, mostly part-time service jobs (thanks to the current resident of the White House) that Americans compete for against a flood of imported, foreign workers, legal and otherwise.

    You make a grave error when you blame all this on the leftists.  The blame lays at the feet of politicians of BOTH the left and the right.  Perhaps it is the people who are the most at fault — because we listen to the political propaganda and believe it.

  • Anonymous

    Why do conservatives hate their children?   Why aren’t they concerned about their children’s future enough to get up to speed on AGW????  When 97.3% of the climate scientists writing “peer reviewed” studies agree that global warming is happening, what more do you need to know.  The science is settled, time to save your kids.  Start by watching my show  BATTA-BING!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4N_Hu79hvI

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, where are you getting your information from?  You claim there’s 60% more ice?????  Please post your sources and be specific so I can make fun of you. Thanks

  • MariaSanchez

    FLAGGED

  • MariaSanchez
  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart the climate always changes.  It’s the increase in temperature that should worry you.  Especially for your kids.  By ignoring AGW you might as well spit in your kids face. Because they’re *ucked, thanks to deniers like you.  Why do you hate your kids?  You need to watch my show.  BATTA-BING!!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4N_Hu79hvI

  • Anonymous

    The mistake made in the 1970′s was to think that the ice age ever ended in the first place.  It didn’t.  

    We are in an interglacial period of the current ice age when the ice retreats marginally, before returning in full force.  During interglacial periods the climate is erratic, swinging between hotter and colder periods, like the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age.  

    Climate scientists haven’t yet figured out exactly what causes ice ages or their interglacial periods.  They have theories, but none cover all the bases.  So, if science can’t figure out what causes the cooling, they also can’t figure out what causes an end to the cooling.  

    Remember all the hysteria about the shrinking ice sheet in the arctic?  Did anyone bother to mention the fact that undersea volcanism in the enclosed, bathtub-like Arctic Sea melted the ice from the underside?  No, I’ll bet not!

    Nor do the folks whining about the ice sheets breaking up along the coast of Antarctica mention the fact they are doing so because so much ice is accumulating on the continent that it is “flowing” out over the warmer ocean and breaking off as a result.

  • MariaSanchez

    FLAGGED

  • Anonymous

    Sammy sweetheart.  My good buddy who can’t understand Obama care, can’t understand AGW either!!!!  Your a conservative dream……..  Too stupid to figure out that you’re having a red, white and blue dildo being shoved up your butt.  Need some vasaline, babe?  You “simple-folk” are so cute, thank you.

  • MariaSanchez

    What is the Earth optimum temperature?  Be specific.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, if you can prove the scientists wrong, please post your evidence, and be specific.  Otherwise piss-off.  OKAY?

  • MariaSanchez

    Many are proving the computer program that you morons are going by is filled with errors. What is the Earths optimum temperature and be specific.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart you keep claiming AGW is a farcical fabrication.  Please post the evidence that conclusively proves your point, otherwise, shut-up, okay?  Did you watch me rip you a new asshole at the 7 minute mark of the show?  It’s BATTA-BEAUTIFUL!!!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4N_Hu79hvI

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart you keep claiming AGW is a farcical fabrication.  Please post the evidence that conclusively proves your point, otherwise, shut-up, okay?  Did you watch me rip you a new asshole at the 7 minute mark of the show?  It’s BATTA-BEAUTIFUL!!!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4N_Hu79hvI

  • MariaSanchez

    FLAGGED

  • MariaSanchez

    What is the Earths optimum temperature and be specific.

  • MariaSanchez

    What is the Earths optimum temperature and be specific.

  • Anonymous

    “..97.3% of the climate scientists writing “peer reviewed” studies agree that global warming is happening..”  
    Out of thousands of scientists contacted, only a handful responded and of those only a few qualified as actual climate scientists.  So, you are talking about 97.3% of a dozen or so alleged “climate scientists,” when over 97.3% thought the whole idea was just so much propaganda BS that they didn’t bother to participate in the fraud.  Sorry, but if you are worried about “the children” you had better start working on how to grow food for billions of children as the weather grows cooler and less friendly to our current crops.

  • Anonymous

    “..97.3% of the climate scientists writing “peer reviewed” studies agree that global warming is happening..”  
    Out of thousands of scientists contacted, only a handful responded and of those only a few qualified as actual climate scientists.  So, you are talking about 97.3% of a dozen or so alleged “climate scientists,” when over 97.3% thought the whole idea was just so much propaganda BS that they didn’t bother to participate in the fraud.  Sorry, but if you are worried about “the children” you had better start working on how to grow food for billions of children as the weather grows cooler and less friendly to our current crops.

  • MariaSanchez

    You nailed it right on the head Tasha.  It’s a play on words this 97.3 BS. When confronted by the brain dead AGW idiots, ask them what the optimal temperature for the Earth is. 

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart I’m referring to a report published by the National Academy Of Sciences. That’s right the National Academy of Sciences!!!!!!!! Do you think you know more then they do?  You “simple-folk” are so cute.  Just the fact that the 1% get’s you to make a fool out of yourself on a national blog, by proving how little you know, is funny.  Thanks for the entertainment.  Now read the study and learn to start loving your kids, please.  http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf+html

  • Anonymous

    Maria this conversation is for big people.  Go Tell your mommy you want to go play in traffic.  Hurry-up.

  • Anonymous

    Nigel Farage does a great job rubbing the nose’s of the climate-change peddlers into their own shit.

    Starting at 1: 20

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFpzaQPKC54

    “After he accepted his Nobel Prize, Al Gore predicted Arctic ice could disappear as soon as 2013″.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVttichSzFk

    Here’s Leonard Nimoy back in 1978 narrating a documentary which alarmed the ignorant masses on how the net ice age was on it’s way.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kGB5MMIAVA

    Time Magazine has acted like a weather vane over the years. Some things just never change, do they? As P.T. Barnum used to say: “there’s a sucker born every minute.” Al Gore is getting rich off of all you suckers. This is not about global warming; it’s about carbon taxes. 

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    I read your link, it’s full of assumptions and in no way can you determine that 97% of scientists agree about MMGW, AGW. You just post things but don’t analyze them or even understand what they say.

    So, once again, what is the Earth optimum temperature?

    Be specific and back it up with facts. You have been playing with children all your life as is evident in your comedy show, now deal with a grownup. Like you say, put up or shut up. Why don’t you answer maria’s question.

  • MariaSanchez

    Answer the question and be specific. Hurry-up.

  • MariaSanchez

    Your study sucks you know. Asking 50 IPCC scientists if they agree with their own studies is idiotic and for you to present it as proof is moronic. The propaganda piece you offered is 3 years old. Time and Science has moved on. Answer my question or STFU.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart you seem like a real “KOCH-SUCKER” who supports the Koch brothers, the 1% and the fossil fuel industry.  Why would you insult your intelligence by posting anything from David Rose and the Daily Mail?  It’s BATTA-BING  time.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH5D9P6KYfY

  • MariaSanchez

    No answer? I figured. You have just proven that you are not very intelligent. You’re just another Liberal idiot.

  • MariaSanchez

    FLAGGED

  • MariaSanchez

    Damn, I was planning on having ocean front property in Montana.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, it’s called “peer-reviewed” for a reason.  When folks publish their study you can see the facts, and argue with it.  See how this works?  If you have a problem with the National Academy of sciences tell them that they’re full of shit and you know more then they do.  BATTA-BING!!

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart what does the optimal temperature of the earth have to do with anything?  Be specific please.

  • Me Wise Magic

    Below are some very insightful articles on “global warming.”  Elitist Maurice Strong (aka the old man from Groundhog Day) must be disappointed he will have to invent another strategy for world domination and international wealth redistribution. 

    Global Warming cycle stopped nearly twenty years ago
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released–chart-prove-it.html

    20 year hiatus in global warming puzzles Australia
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980

    Global Warming and fear mongering
    http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/07/26/global-warming-fear-mongering/

    Scientists in Japan, Israel, China, Australia, Russia, and South America have all moved on from Global Warming.  We were right again. 

  • Anonymous

    I won’t offer a prediction on climate change, but I will predict that individuals like yourself within a few more years will have a bad case of lockjaw when the subject of global warming comes up.

    Anybody who gets all worked up in a sweat over all this climate change crap should take a few minutes and research history. This scam is played over and over again in the past because it sells newspapers and magazines.

    Just take a look at some of these old headlines before you start shitting your pants over climate change. 

     http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/1970s-ice-age-scare/ 

  • MariaSanchez

    Do you think that a persons who publish papers are going to deny what they published? Do you think that the 50 IPCC scientists in your idiotic study are going to criticize each other? You are a real moron.

    Why don’t you answer my question, what is the Earth optimum temperature. You dodge, you insult, you even try and deflect but you don’t answer it. Come on, be specific. I see how it works, you’re full of shit. I know how to read, you only know how to mouth off and spin. Put up or STFU.

  • MariaSanchez

    How are you going to prove a half a degree in the Earths temperature is going to be damaging if you don’t know what the Earths Optimum temperature is. Everything you global warming idiots believe depends on it.

    You really aren’t this stupid, are you? Answer the question and be specific. If not, STFU. See how this works? You’re not that bright, are you?

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart,  you’re referring to the Daily Mail.  That’s embarrassing.  Do you post things from the national enquirer?  Of course not.  You “simple-folk” are so cute.  When you start quoting “peer-revieved” studies, I’ll start listening to you.  Until then you’re just pissing in the wind?

  • Anonymous

    Exactly correct. Not one of the computer projection models works when real data is fed into it. Yet, we’re supposed to believe that they can accurately predict years into the future what they cannot accurately predict 15 minutes from now. The “science” of climatology is now filled with social activists, not careful, reasoned scientists. 

    However, I’m actually surprised that they didn’t just lie and fabricate data that perfectly matches what they are claiming. The best scientists whose names were on the original report and wrote a well reasoned summary of the current data, found that their work had been completely rewritten with wild claims, including the 2007 UNIPCC report that claimed that by 2035, temperatures will have risen so much that all ice in the Himalayas will have melted. They asked to have their names removed prior to the publication of the document. The UN agreed, then proceeded to publish the work under their names, patently refusing to remove their names until they were forced to in court, nearly two years after the fact. In the meantime, they continued to claim that these scientists had placed their stamp of approval on the body of work represented by the document. Now the damage has been done. 

    Al Gore’s mentor, Roger Revelle, has retracted the claims that originally began the global warming craze. Yet, Al Gore disagrees with him (of course he does, being so qualified scientifically to take issue with the climatologist who started the craze that made him rich). 

    We’ve now had TWO “climategates” in which so called “reputable” climate scientists were caught writing back and forth with journalists and other scientists bemoaning the fact that their recorded temperature and sea level data didn’t match the computer projections and how they were planning on using the same “trick” that one of their colleagues had utilized to massage the data. They claimed that they meant a statistical leveling formula, but no statistician could derive the original data utilizing inverse regression, meaning the “trick” was simply changing readings to reflect what they wanted it to. 

    Al Gore claimed two years ago at a climate conference that there would be absolutely NO sea ice during the summer months in the Arctic. The BBC claimed the same thing. Yet, just as we saw with the ozone layer, a 60% increase in sea ice this year (more than 1,000,000 more square miles than previously recorded) resulted in more than 20 yachts being stranded in locked in sea ice as they attempted to travel the “Northwest Passage” from the Atlantic to the Pacific. A cruise ship chartered to make the same trip had to turn back after nearly becoming stranded themselves. Apparently, they trusted the lying jackasses at the UNIPCC. After all, that’s hardcore data, isn’t it?

    Now, every reputable climate lab is reeling from the wild eyed predictions not bearing up in reality. Unfortunately, they had also blamed the US for the claimed calamities. For dedicated socialists, though, like our president and Al Gore, no change whatsoever is looming on the horizon. Like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, if there’s no villain, there’s no reason for their existence. Therefore, no matter what happens, they will ALWAYS claim that the US is singlehandedly responsible for all of the world’s ills. Obama KNOWS the contents of the report, yet he is forging full steam ahead on destroying the US economy to implement new coal and oil standards that are simply unachievable and unaffordable under current technology. 

    Of course, for the dedicated socialist, the destruction of capitalism is the ultimate goal and lying, dictatorial political action in the name of the cause are simply du jour for these despicable, worthless wastes of good carbon. 

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, I don’t try to prove anything. I let the climate-scientists writing “peer-reviewed” studies give me the information.  It a shame nobody ever taught you this.  Are you home-schooled? 

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart what is the earths optimal temperature, and why is it important?  Please cite the “peer-reviewed”  study you are reffering too.  Thank you. And then watch my show.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4N_Hu79hvI

  • MariaSanchez

    You just belittle others, call them names and act like an A-Hole. You’re only here to promote your childish BS on YouTube. That’s why I FLAG your nonsense. You can’t answer one very relevant question but you can call people a “KOCH-SUCKER” because you’re an idiot.

    I’ve read many studies, had a friend who spent 1 year at McMurdo Station. I also have friends who are scientist at Woods Hole. Are you schooled? I doubt it.

  • MariaSanchez

    FLAGGED

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, did you realize that noting you posted is “peer-reviwed” and verifiable.  You “KOCH-SUCKERS” who support the Koch brothers will post anything to prove your an asshole.  Thank you.  Did the Koch brothers get you to hate your kids yet?

  • Anonymous

    “The science of climatology is now filled with social activists, not careful, reasoned scientists”.

    Very well said. On this subject I completely agree with you. 

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    That’s the question you refuse to answer. Don’t you know? You’re promoting this Global Warming myth not me. Ask one of your scientist buddies to answer it and then bet back to me with the answer.

    I’m a grown-up, I’m really selective in what I watch. Stupidity is not on my list.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart why do you call yourself reality seeker.  Yet you claim AGW is a scam.  Okay what “peer-reviewed” evidence do you have?  It it’s not “peer-reviewed”  you got nothing.  CAPICE!!!!

  • Fire wolf

    Christians struggle to explain the lack of angels, and burning bushes.

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    Vacuumman only has insults. He spews what he’s been programmed with. None of those GW idiotic predictions over the past 15 years have come true. It’s a money grabbing hoax perpetrated on the public by Al Gore.  He has a company that sells carbon credits. That’s all it is. 

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, I belittle you because you deserve it.  That fact that you have friends at woods hole proves nothing.  Why are you having such a hard time with this?  The only thing we accept is “peer-reviewed” studies.  If your friend at Woods hole published “peer-reviwed”  studies.  Then I read it, Until then you’re just making a fool out of yourself and your family.  BATTA-BING!!

  • Anonymous

    “noting you posted is “peer-reviwed” and verifiable”.

    You’ve got yourself all worked up over this global warming nonsense , don’t you? There, there, it’ll be alright, so take a deep breath and calm down. The sky isn’t falling and the polar caps aren’t melting. Sorry to have to be the one to break the truth to you, but your hero, Al Gore, lied. I can see you’re still in denial to the point of hysteria, and I bet you’re so worked up that you’re about to get an orgasm……..lol

    Psssst…. hey, by the way, we had this conversation before, remember? Shall we again discuss what’s obviously “verifiable”? OK, let’s do that: Just take a look at NASA’s latest pictures of the ice cap, you bone head, and that should tell you everything you need to know…….lol.

  • Anonymous

    Joe sweetheart if you have “peer-reviewed” studies that prove the earth hasn’t warmed in the last 15 years, post it. If not piss off.  BYE BYE joey we’ll never hear from you again.  I love BITCH-SLAPPING the “simple-folk” Thank you.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart I posted  “peer-reviewed” studies from the National Academy of Sciences!!!  Your posting a picture from the daily mail.  Which is more reputable???   You “simple-folk” are so easily fooled.  Thanks for proving my point. BATTA-BING!!

  • MariaSanchez

    You’re just a moron trying to promote your nothing show. My friends all have told me that it’s a funding thing. Most climate scientists depend on the myth to keep government funds flowing. The government doesn’t want to hear anything contrary to their agenda and their agenda is getting a law passed based on carbon credits and cap-and-trade.

    There’s only one fool here and that’s you. You’re full of your own BS. I don’t really blame you kiddo, you can’t help yourself. Time will tell but so far all your doom and gloom predictions have failed to materialize. You’re not even smart enough to understand the significance of determining what the Earth optimum temperature has to do with the discussion. You can’t read, can you? You have a NY public school education don’t you?

  • Anonymous

    Actually, I think he’s kinda nice to have around.

    Having a neurotic little cock sucker like him around is rather amusing….lol…

    In a way, he’s almost like a pet, you know, like one of those hyper-active-ankle-biting Chihuahuas. I enjoy marginalizing him. In a few years he’ll finally figure out that he was duped right before he latches onto the next scam. Then, off he’ll go barking up a storm about some other enviro-crusade.

  • MariaSanchez

    Where did you post a “peer-reviewed” study that has to do with proving global warming?

  • http://www.artinphoenix.com/gallery/grimm snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

    Good post and very true. I recall reading a statement from the Nixon Presidency in which a member of his admin stated to the effect that by 2000, the polar ice would have melted completely and raised the ocean sea levels by 10 feet.

    Needless to say, it never happened.

    As for the yachts and cruse ship, they should have checked their weather station instead of the UN.

  • Anonymous

    Down boy!

    I didn’t post anything from the Daily Mail; you’re confused again…lol

    I don’t think you even examined my sources because Al Gore has got you by the balls…….

    Here, I’ll post the latest NASA images for you again, just in case you’re too busy giving Al Gore a reach around…….. 

     http://www.isciencetimes.com/articles/6040/20130911/global-cooling-arctic-ice-cap-60-photo.htm

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    He’s promoting windmills on Semi Trucks and freight trains.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    I know it is the reason millions of people can’t find work. That 53% of this country hates Obamacare but go right ahead live in crackhead land and worship Obama as a god. Maybe you should pray to Obama and have him change reality to fit your delusions.

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    You are stuck in the 90′s pal. read a little, expand the size of your pea brain. You still haven’t answered Maria’s question. Still dodging I see. What a moroon.

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    Where’s your peer reviewed evidence that proves AGW? Be specific.

  • greywolfrs

    And you struggle to explain your lack of intelligence.

  • greywolfrs

    As you refer to your retarded home videos. What’s embarrassing is you actually believe you know something. Carry on, dunce.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, You’ve proven that you don’t understand the “peer-reviewed process”  and you say I’m not intelligent????   WTF!!  You don’t know enough to even question your sources, that’s sad.  Are you a creationist?

  • greywolfrs

    You really can’t expect an answer since that retard doesn’t have the first clue about which they speak.

  • greywolfrs

    Hey stupid, a bunch of idiotrs who agree with each other so they don’t lose their funding is exactly who you should be listening to. You are a moron of epic proportions. Dunce.

  • Anonymous

    Of course there’s global warming!!  Don’t you see the changes in the climate?  Heat, cooling,

    floods, tornadoes (still waiting for hurricane season)!  Don’t you know all this is going on??  How

    else can we push for Green Energy programs (thereby enriching ourselves), if there isn’t global

    warming?   (Guess there’s no such thing as: Climate happens.)

  • greywolfrs

    YOu are idiot, she is having a “big people” conversation, you are unable to keep up, then spout this stupidity. Hey dunce, get your whole head in front of the shotgun.

  • MariaSanchez

    You clearly have demonstrated that you don’t know the difference in a “discussion group” and a “Scientific Study.”

    Yes, you’re not very intelligent, you’ve already proven that. Now you’re claiming creationism is causing Global Warming? Please!

  • greywolfrs

    Hey stupid, which OS are you using to reach this site? Is it Windows or Mac OS? You do realize that using either means you are supporting the 1%, right? Hey dickhead, by posting your stupidity on youtube, you realize you are supporting the 1%, right?

    You are beyond dumb.

  • MariaSanchez

    I know. He’s full of himself but if he took a dump he’d feel 100 lbs lighter.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, what I know Is what has been proven in the “peer reviewed process” something you should learn about.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, So what you’re claiming is that scientists agree with each other so they don’t loose their funding, right?  Do you realize what a complete and utter asshole this makes you?  That’s why we have “peer-reviewed studies”  you bonehead.  When somebody posts something that is bullshit, the other scientists rip them a new asshole.  It’s sad this is too complicated for you to understand.  But the 1% depends on un-scientific, fact less, people like you.  Thanks.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart the 1% and the Koch brothers depend on “KOCH-SUCKERS” like you to promote global warming denial.  They want you to hate your kids, and they want you to put their party ahead of your children.  They want you to spit in your kids face and tell them global warming is not real.  Your kids are gonna grow up to hate you, because you didn’t care enough about their future to learn about AGW.  And you deserve it.  BATTA-BING!!  You suck!!!

  • http://suzeraining.wordpress.com/ suz

    stu asks: “how long can this go on?”  suz answers:  as long as we have stupid americans who practice suspension of reality and fact (stupid) and apathetic (uncaring) americans.  assessement:  we have both … a lot of both.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart I’m a BITCH-SLAPPER who loves toying with the “simple-folk” like you.  It’s so much fun dealing with fact less deniers like you.  Tell me what the National Academy of Sciences got wrong?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4N_Hu79hvI

  • MariaSanchez

    My kids adore me. I gave them life. You seem to be projecting your own failures. So your kids hate you I’m not surprised at that. I’m a leader not a AGW follower like you. go make faces into your basement YouTube camera and leave us grownups alone. Don’t you have some sort of kids pinwheel to blow into on the sidewalk?

  • MariaSanchez

    FLAGGED

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    They actually got some things right or they did rather. It’s all subjective. You really didn’t read your source, did you? I read it a couple years ago.

    “Regarding the influence of citation patterns, we acknowledge that it is
    difficult to quantify potential biases of self-citation or clique citation in the
    analysis presented here. However, citation analysis research suggests that the
    potential of these patterns to influence results is likely to decline as sample size
    of researchers, possible cliques, and papers analyzed for citations considered
    increases (22, 25–28). By selecting an expansive sample of 1,372 researchers
    and focusing our analysis only on the researchers’four most-cited papers, we
    have designed our study to minimize the potential influence of these patterns. Furthermore, we have no a priori basis for assuming any citation (e.g.,
    self-citation rates) or demographic differences (e.g., age effect on publications or citations) between CE and UE groups. Preliminary evidence suggests these differences would likely favor the UE group. From the ∼60% of
    researchers where year of PhD was available, mean year of receiving a PhD
    for UE researchers was 1977, versus 1987 for CE researchers, implying that UE
    researchers should have on average more publications due to an age effect
    alone. Therefore, these methods are likely to provide a reasonable estimate
    of the preeminent researchers in each group and are useful in comparing the
    relative expertise and prominence between CE and UE groups.
    Ultimately, of course, scientific confidence is earned by the winnowing
    process of peer review and replication of studies over time. In the meanwhile,
    given the immediacy attendant to the state of debate over perception of
    climate science, we must seek estimates while confidence builds. Based on the
    arguments presented here, we believe our findings capture the differential
    climate science credentials of the two groups”

    “Between December 2008 and July 2009, we collected the number of
    climate-relevant publications for all 1,372 researchers from Google Scholar
    (search terms: “author:fi-lastname climate”), as well as the number of times
    cited for each researcher’s four top-cited articles in any field (search term
    “climate” removed). Overall number of publications was not used because it
    was not possible to provide accurate publication counts in all cases because
    of similarly named researchers. We verified, however, author identity for the
    four top-cited papers by each author.
    To examine only researchers with demonstrated climate expertise, we
    imposed a 20 climate-publications minimum to be considered a climate researcher, bringing the list to 908 researchers (NCE= 817;NUE= 93). Our dataset
    is not comprehensive of the climate community and therefore does not infer
    absolute numbers or proportions of all CE versus all UE researchers. We acknowledge that there are other possible and valid approaches to quantifying
    the level of agreement and relative credibility in the climate science community, including alternate climate researcher cutoffs, publication databases,
    and search terms to determine climate-relevant publications. However, we
    provide a useful, conservative, and reasonable approach whose qualitative
    results are not likely to be affected by the above assumptions. We conducted
    the above analyses with a climate researcher cutoff of a minimum of 10 and
    40 publications, which yielded very little change in the qualitative or strong
    statistically significant differences between CE and UE groups. Researcher
    publication and citation counts in Earth Sciences have been found to be
    largely similar between Google Scholar and other peer-review-only citation
    indices such as ISI Web of Science (20). Indeed, using Google Scholar provides
    a more conservative estimate of expertise (e.g., higher levels of publications
    and more experts considered) because it archives a greater breadth of sources
    than other citation indices. Our climate-relevant search term does not, understandably, capture all relevant publications and exclude all nonrelevant
    publications in the detection and attribution of ACC, but we suggest that its
    generality provides a conservative estimate of expertise (i.e., higher numbers
    of experts) that should not differentially favor either group.”

    Richard Horton, editor of the British medical journal The Lancet, has said

    “The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any more than a crude means of discovering the acceptability—not the validity—of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on the pivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong.”

  • Anonymous

    Fatty you are so fat and uninformed why don’t you give the weather channel ,NBC ABC CBS and i’m sure FATTY the one you love the most FOX oh yea and mommies favorite THE BLAZE  when you figure all of this out DADDY FATTY get back with me on the facts and the we will get on to that other thing we need to clear up the one you know about how you look like a idiot on here . There are other sites where you can play with the youth of today be careful Mrs.Oblunder has them learning about being FATTIES now go to bed and dream of me and the facts that were just stuffed down your FAT gullet ! SWEETFART you make me laugh more every time I see your crap keep it up love it OH FATTY.

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    Sorry, no takers. I’ve seen your clownish childish crap.

    As Maria has pointed out, you don’t seem to know the difference between a “Scientific Study” and a “discussion group.” LMAO

  • Anonymous

    Reality Seeker, Vacman knows absolutely nothing about science or what “peer reviewed” means. He’s never read a climate study in his life, and if he did, he wouldn’t understand any of it. He thinks the National Academy of Science is the source of peer reviewed climate research. He’s just groping. Engaging him is a waste of time. He’s so uneducated he has no idea how little he knows. The man thrives on nothing more than hatred. Let him do his own research, or as he calls it, cracking a six pack.

  • Anonymous

    Ma’am (Maria)
    I understand it is not my fight but this guy is out there and you are wasting time spend your time with those wonderful children it is much more rewarding I gave up along time ago .
    If I have offended you please accept my apologies I have just found that speaking to some of the rock heads are not healthy for good people and I too have found it is time for me to change  and just delete stupid .
    Have a wonderful weekend with your family God bless

  • Anonymous

    AMEN
    just hit delete life is much better without crap on the shoe or computer

  • Anonymous

    To the bullying “sweetheart” of all of us (you do get around), of course, the earth has warmed before, as far as science can detect. You may want to sit down for this but the science isn’t settled. What’s most relevant to this discussion is whether carbon dioxide, regardless of source, has played a role in earth’s temperature fluctuation. The data indicate that carbon dioxide may not drive temperature because temperature increases before atmospheric carbon dioxide (Vostok ice core data). There is very little relevant data to examine from any other source. So…should we be dealing with carbon dioxide when it does not appear to be the cause of the earth’s increasing temperature? Note: Climate models may be alarming but these models are built on the assumption  that CO2 level drives temperature – without proof – like the assumed greenhouse effect that the 96% CO2 atmosphere has on Venus. You can assume that [CO2] drives temperature (questionable) or assume that the less than 1% CO2 atmosphere of earth (~0.04%) has essentially no impact – since it fluctuates at around that level regardless of temperature. Check these out.

    http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/ice_core_co2.html

    http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/

    I am also looking into another line of research that may have some relevance. It appears that the polar ice caps on Mars have receded in the past 50 years. There are only a handful of manuscripts on the topic but if those findings are verified it will attest to a shocking but simple fact: it could be that the sun drives earth’s temperature.

  • HP McLovincraft

    FLAGGED! Potty mouth. Keep your blasphemy to yourself. LOL

  • HP McLovincraft

    Maria is a snitch, like Average Joe. Dipshits.

  • HP McLovincraft

    Average Joe needs a Waaaambulance. His pussy is hurting again.

  • HP McLovincraft

    Careful, he’ll tattle!

  • HP McLovincraft

    12

  • HP McLovincraft

    TATTLETAIL

  • HP McLovincraft

    Sam, your Uncledaddy called. It’s your turn in the Glory Hole.

  • HP McLovincraft

    You guys sure do play the victim card a lot. Big mean bullies picking on you again? Maybe Maria Dirty Sanchez or Average Snitch Joe will cry to the mods.

    What a bunch of whiny, bitchy little girls!
    ROFL.
    Rise Our Father Lucifer!

  • HP McLovincraft

    And you struggle to get an erection.

  • HP McLovincraft

    FLAGGED

  • HP McLovincraft

    FLAGGED

  • HP McLovincraft

    Your retarded friends at the group home?

  • HP McLovincraft

    Gaybeyondempty. Thanks for draining my balls for me.

  • Guest
  • Guest

     Looks like Joe Bitch Slapped you with his post that discredits the Peer Review validity  LMAO !
     
    Vac, you are truly the simple folk…. Obama sucker!

  • Guest

    Peer review does not ‘prove’ anything, but it did convince as lot of “simple folk” like you.

  • Guest

     Hopefully it will warm more so we get back to what it was before the last ice age.

  • Guest

    Excellent post.

  • Guest

     catdaddio made an intelligent post and you respond with this irrelevant garbage? What an asshole you are.

  • Guest

    They have been told as much by other scientists, moron.

  • Guest

     You can’t answer the simple question they asked you LMFAO!  . . . You are a fraud !!!!!!

  • Adonis J. King

    OK.. I Disdain Gore, generally oppose a Carbon Tax and am not a big “Global Warming” advocate overall but I cant believe these talking heads know a thing about the science of “Climate Change” (which is not the current term used as explained in a moment) enough to forecast what the weather will be in an hour . 

    First, the reason the models of the “worst-case scenario models” never occurred was BECAUSE “worst case” is based in what would happen if current problems advanced and nothing changed.. well, I could suggest also that people DID react, took action and began to reduce the things causing the problems so that he MODELS (based on forecast projections in which no action was taken) would of course change the outcome ..

    Next, You might note that the PUNDIDIOTS themselves admit that the weather HAS been odd and anyone who actually has more than a NEO-CON BECKITE education level of science understands that our odd weather lately IS the result of what you people are trying so hard to deny. 

    It’s oversimplification to say..”Oh..well golly..it ain’t gittin’ hotter so there aint nuthin’ to this ‘goobal war,in’ thang.” which is the reason why the term “global Warming” is no longer used by anyone who takes the potential of this phenomenon seriously.. it confused the under-educated non-science literate who assumed the process was simply a turning up of global temperatures.

    I can’t believe they framed this like a true user of NLP Mind Control by comparing the idea that those who “deny climate change” are being viewed as “Holocaust Deniers”.. What this does is not only frame the idea in the mind that those who deny climate change are “Victims” but also transversely is comparing those who believe in “Climate Change” to be seen subconsciously as “Nazi Persecutors”.

    Fact is that its BIG OIL AND GAS COMPANIES (Frackers) and other heavy polluters like the KOCH BROS (incl. Weyerhaeuser . a company I know well from living in the Wallamette Valley in Oregon and which is oft reffered to in the area as the “Armpit of the Valley”) who pay PR Firms and talking heads to create and propagate this false propaganda that somehow people who care about the environment are  “anti-american hippy commie jihadist baby-killer Nazi’s “.and its all to get YOU..the good people, who are just trusting them blindly. to just accept their ideas without actually digging deeper or asking any questions..because you are a TRUE AMERICAN iand all other info that does not confirm this bias is “Leftist Commie Muslim sh*t” and any True American knows the KOCH BROTHERS GOD-FEARING FLAG WAVING ALL AMERICAN CAPITALIST PR GUYS must know more than those “Leftie Hippie Freak Nazi” Scientists who wish to enslave us all with their evil “Agenda 21″ (insert ominous muzajk here).

    Those who wish to control you wont actually encourage you to think for yourself and look at both sides of this issue in a balanced manner.. and even if you do their NLP method of mind-fracking has likely already fed you the mindset of how horrible you are for questioning everything evenly using balanced scientific research and not just more NEO-CON “confirmation Bias”.

    I realize that some of what i said here may be taken as caustic or smug and perhaps even just a little hypocritical (since I deliberately used a little reverse NLP so the wise may see) but somebody has to encourage people to look outside their own boxes and the boxes they impose on themselves by believing things based on the words of Talking Heads like Beck and his minions who want you to be confused and afraid and listening ONLY to ONE SIDE by first trivializing and then demonizing the other.

    PEACE!
    ~a~.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, you claim to be looking into another line of research that might have some relevance, right?  Do us a favor, don’t waste your time.  The science is settled.  The only research you need to do is to ask the climate scientists.  That’s it, don’t waste your time posting bullshit from people who don’t know what their talking about!!! The only source you need to be concerned with is what the climate scientists writing “peer-reviewed”  studies.  Noting else.  Got it?

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, of course, you would consider that an excellent post.  You’re not concerned with what the climate scientists say, why is that?  Why do you insist on being  a “KOCH-SUCKER”  who supports the Koch brothers and the 1% instead of your fellow Americans.  How did the 1% get you to become such a hater?  You need a dose of reality.  You need to watch my show.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4N_Hu79hvI

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, you can post all the bullshit you want.  But when it comes to facts, the only thing we will accept is “peer-reviewed studies” from climate scientists, nothing less.  Understand? 

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, by saying peer review does not prove anything, proves how truly stupid an uneducated you are.  I’ll bet you’re a creationist, am I right?

  • Anonymous

    Uh,  1,300 surveyed, one third are dissenters and most of the piece is a disclaimer:

    “A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers,and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions.”

    Sorry, dude, but I’m in the Ice Age camp and have been since the 1970′s.  We are finally seeing the cooling predicted back then.  You really need to lay off the “cargo cult science” propaganda from Maggie Thatcher’s warmists and start studying volcanism and ice ages.

    One good volcanic “burp” equals all the anthropogenic carbon emissions for a year.  There are multiple volcanoes going off at any given time every day of the week.  Unless it is a spectacular eruption or one that kills a bunch of people, you don’t hear much about all the volcanic activity going on around the world (and under the seas).

    http://www.volcano.si.edu/

    Besides, logic is against your argument.  If the powers that be really believed in the whole anthropogenic global warming BS, why is the first world importing people from lower per capita carbon footprint countries into higher per capita carbon footprint countries? 

    Look, the US could reduce our total carbon footprint by at least a half billion tons per year simply by deporting all the illegal aliens back to their third world homelands.  Total world carbon would also be reduced as the carbon footprint for the deported would be much smaller in their homelands than in the US.  But, the opposite is being proposed.  

    Also, if we wanted to “Save Mother Earth” from anthropogenic global warming, we would be only taking immigrants from countries with similar per capita carbon footprints, like, Canada and Australia, not Mexico and Central America which have significantly lower per capita carbon footprints.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    “The soldier is the Army. No army is better than its soldiers. The Soldier is also a citizen. In fact, the highest obligation and privilege of citizenship is that of bearing arms for one’s country”
    ― George S. Patton Jr.

  • https://twitter.com/DMcNee52 Cracker LongHorn

    >>  You are beyond dumb.

    What is your problem, Son?  Am I going to have to go Cracker on your Dumbass?  Look at me Boy when I’m talking to you Son.  Calling Humans names just makes you look like an 8 year old whining Asshole American Kid.  Stop Embarrassing us Son.

  • RichardIsGod, In the

      Did the Koch brothers get you to hate your kids yet?

    You are arguing with idiots.  They are Fishes in a Fish Bowl.  They probably are all Non-Smokers that can’t figure out what smoking does?  Remember, they think their Santa Claus God snapped his fingers and created this oxygen they love to snort.

    Humans used to poop in their own Drinking Water.  They are not very smart.

  • greywolfrs

    My degree says otherwise. Again, why did you stop using the strtlk and critter accounts? Moron.

  • greywolfrs

    That all you got? Stupid little kid.

  • americanathlete

    Hahahaha

  • americanathlete

    And in Utah……

  • americanathlete

    Global warming is the biggest bunch of bs! Al Gore loses more credibility every day…like he had any to begin with!!!

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, what did gore get wrong.  Tell u s how he loses credibility everyday, and Be specific.  Thank you.

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    Gore says that a sea-level rise of up to 6 m (20 ft) will be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland. Though Gore does not say that the sea-level rise will occur in the near future, the judge found that, in the context, it was clear that this is what he had meant, since he showed expensive graphical representations of the effect of his imagined 6 m (20 ft) sea-level rise on existing populations, and he quantified the numbers who would be displaced by the sea-level rise.

    The IPCC says sea-level increases up to 7 m (23 ft) above today’s levels have happened naturally in the past climate, and would only be likely to happen again after several millennia. In the next 100 years, according to calculations based on figures in the IPCC’s 2007 report, these two ice sheets between them will add a little over 6 cm (2.5 inches) to sea level, not 6 m (this figure of 6 cm is 15% of the IPCC’s total central estimate of a 43 cm or 1 ft 5 in sea-level rise over the next century). Gore has accordingly exaggerated the official sea-level estimate by approaching 10,000 per cent.

    Gore says low-lying inhabited Pacific coral atolls are already being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming, leading to the evacuation of several island populations to New Zealand. However, the atolls are not being inundated, except where dynamiting of reefs or over-extraction of fresh water by local populations has caused damage.

    Furthermore, corals can grow at ten times the predicted rate of increase in sea level. It is not by some accident or coincidence that so many atolls reach just a few feet above the ocean surface.

    Gore says “global warming” may shut down the thermohaline circulation in the oceans, which he calls the “ocean conveyor,” plunging Europe into an ice age. It will not. A paper published in 2006 says: “Analyses of ocean observations and model simulations suggest that changes in the thermohaline circulation during the last century are likely the result of natural multidecadal climate variability. Indications of a sustained thermohaline circulation weakening are not seen during the last few decades. Instead, a strengthening since the 1980s is observed.”

    Gore says that in each of the last four interglacial warm periods it was changes in carbon dioxide concentration that caused changes in temperature. It was the other way about. Changes in temperature preceded changes in CO2 concentration by between 800 and 2800 years, as scientific papers including the paper on which Gore’s film had relied had made clear.

    Gore says “global warming” has been melting the snows of Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa. It is not.

    The melting of the Furtwangler Glacier at the summit of the mountain began 125 years ago. More of the glacier had melted before Hemingway wrote The Snows of Kilimanjaro in 1936 than afterward.

    Temperature at the summit never rises above freezing and is at an average of –7 Celsius. The cause of the melting is long-term climate shifts exacerbated by imprudent regional deforestation, and has nothing to do with “global warming.”

    Gore says “global warming” dried up Lake Chad in Africa. It did not. Over-extraction of water and changing agricultural patterns dried the lake, which was also dry in 8500BC, 5500BC, 1000BC and 100BC. Ms. Kreider says, “There are multiple stresses upon Lake Chad.” However, the scientific consensus is that at present those “stresses” do not include “global warming.”

    Just a few.

    Ref. ] See (http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20060331_issues.pdf)

    [1] See: (http://ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=336&Itemid=77)

    [1] See discussion at: (http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/Kiliman-MAC-4-8-04.pdf)

    [1] For a serioius examination of this issue, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_reprint_series/polar_bears_of_western_hudson_bay_and….html)

    [1] Are Coral Reefs Endangered by Global Warming? (http://ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=382&Itemid=77)

    [1] For a discussion of future hurricane trends for Florida, see: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on….html)

    [1] For an in depth look at these issues, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/hurricanethreat.html)

    [1] For a discussion of the sun’s role in climate, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_originals/the_unruly_sunne_cannot_be_ruled_out_as_a_cause….html)

    [1] See: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus…html)

    [1] For fuller discussion of Polar regions and Greenland, see: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html)

    [1] Discussion by world-class expert and IPCC reviewer: (http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/reiter-climate-change-mbd.pdf)

  • Anonymous

    Maybe the temp change was because of the Weather Modification Project ( HAARP).
    Look it up.  Who is actually manipulating the weather? Take a look at all the weather control station around the country and who is operating them and that’s only here in the U.S..  What about all the holes they have punched in our inner and outer atmosphere.  And they have the nerve to call this stuff Natural Disasters!    

  • RichardIsGod, In the

    And what degree would that be?  I’m gonna bet you like guns and desparately need help.  Please get it before you go Postal and kill 12 others.

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    A lot of BS. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/megan.mcclure.311 Megan McClure

     He’s AL GORE. You really need specifics? hahahahaaaaaaaaaa

  • http://www.facebook.com/megan.mcclure.311 Megan McClure

    What a douche! Total lack of common sense and placing everyone else beneath his multi syllable education. Look at history, look at weather patterns, use that thing inside your head called a brain. Do your own homework!

  • http://www.facebook.com/megan.mcclure.311 Megan McClure

    “The science is settled.  The only research you need to do is to ask the climate scientists “… how they always get it wrong?

  • Liberalism is Nonsense

    Your lighthouse in the fog conjured up by the quacks, progressives, and clowns who pollute today’s mass media: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0094KY878

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    Yup that is the reason Al Gore went and got house on the beach. If he truly believed his own horse crap why would he do that?

  • Guest

    You are wrong, but then you are always wrong.

    When your ‘peers’ have only to work with the model and data you supply, they will get the same erroneous conclusions you do. Funny how some peers jumped ship and wanted no p[art of it when they realized it was rigged, but their names were still used even though they requested not to be. That is telling.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    You can’t agure with morons that believe in the earth warming because they think this will happen if we turn on one more light. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIdPPVkkHYs 

  • Guest

    I am interested in what REAL unbiased climate scientists say, not these clowns that rigged the “study”.

    Your assumptions about me are way off base, confirming how poor your judgement is. I don’t support the Koch brothers, or the 1%, nor am I a hater. You are the KOCH-SUCKER that needs a dose of reality, and nobody needs to watch your absurd show.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart instead of making an ass out of yourself why don’t you post the specifics, and we can all laugh at you.  Remember be specific.

  • Anonymous

    Sammy why aren’t you in church?   Are you a hypo-Christian?  Go pad the preachers pockets.   

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart that’s why the climate scientists write peer-reviewed published studies.  So that when they get it wrong you can prove they got it wrong.  Okay, sweety your up.  Prove through evidence that they got it wrong, and don’t forget to be specific, because I’m gonna check everything.  BATTA-BING!!

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart that’s why we have published, peer reviewed studies.  By putting everything in writing we eliminate bullshit. The most favorite thing a scientist can do is make himself famous, by proving another scientist wrong.  See how this works? So according to you these clowns rigged the study, right?  Well because it’s published now you can prove them wrong, right? Okay babe, now prove your point and remember to be specific. Remember,what you’re writing, will be peer-reviewed and boy are we gonna have fun.  Let the embarrassment begin!!!!!!!! 

  • Anonymous

    That’s right remember he sold current TV to are best friends to but most will not even give it a second thought professional liar’s 91% haven’t a clue God bless

  • Anonymous

    Why do billionaires tend to be democrats?
    The vast majority of billionaires in the US supported Obama and are democrats.

    Bill and Melinda Gates $53 billion, Supported Obama, Democrats

    Warren Buffett $47 billion, Supported Obama, Democrat

    Eli Broad $5.9 billion, Supported Obama, Democrats http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/6459

    John Doerr, $1.7 billion, Supported Obama, Democrat http://venturebeat.com/2009/02/06/obama-appoints-john-doerr-to-economic-advisory-board

    Gerry Lenfest, Supported Obama, Sestak, Democrat 
    http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/gerry-lenfest.asp?cycle=10

    John Morgridge, $1.6 billion. Supported Obama, Democrat 
    http://www.newsmeat.com/ceo_political_donations/John_Morgridge.php

    Paul Allen $13.5 billion, Supported Obama, Democrat 
    http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/paul-allen.asp?cycle=10

    Laura and John Arnold, $4 billion, Supported Obama, Democrat 
    http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/john-arnold.asp?cycle=08

    Michael Bloomberg, $18 billion. Supported Obama, Democrat

    Michele Chan, $5 billion. Supported Obama, Democrat

    Barry Diller, $1.2 billion. Supported Obama, Democrat - 
    http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/10/barry_diller_says_hell_vote_fo.html

    Why are democrats the party of billionaires? 
    p.s. I challenge anyone to find even half as many republican billionaires as democrat ones…you wont do it. more than 75% of all US billionaires are democrats. ask yourself…why is that?

  • Anonymous

     Nimoy was right. The evidence has been buried because it contradicts the global-warming doctrine, but you will see in your lifetime how a new ice age is indeed coming soon.

  • Anonymous

     It is SO funny the way you envision the Koch brothers to be these all-controlling, larger-than-life characters who somehow wield super powers. Be it global warming, Islamist terror, limits on abortion or union-busting, the Koch brothers are behind it all! Hysterical!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    Don’t start to 9:25 first of all and second of all how am I supposed to get money to pay my 10% if Obamacare took all work from the area. They even closed the local store because they could not pay for you to irresponsibility and not work for yourself so because of you liberals and your caring 50 people lost their jobs and now everyone has to drive an hour away to get any food. Thanks lazy liberal.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    They really don’t and as I said before astronomers notice solar patterns that have more effect on climate than anything else. Sun get’s more active and throws more heat than sun slows down in activity than it get’s colder. these liberals and these so called climate scientist ignore said facts. Liberals do it because they claim it is not the right field but we are posted to believe that astronomers don’t know anything about how the sun works even tho the study everything in space. At the same time we are to believe climate scientist who look at weather patterns calling their findings bull. They are the modern day snake oil sells men

  • Anonymous

    Sammy where do you live?  You make it seem like a ghost town.  Things can’t be that bad, can they? 

  • Guest

    Putting everything in writing doesn’t eliminate bullshit. Look at the stuff you put in writing. The scientists who asked not to be listed as peer reviewers agreeing were listed against their wishes as they contradicted the rigged study. Rigged as in the model was modified a number of times to get the results desired. The data was selected in a way that gave the desired results. Certain things were omitted intentionally – solar activity, tectonic plate movement, sub-oceanic volcanic activity, atmospheric methane concentration as well as water vapor effects and other things.

    It was not only flawed, it was rigged. Clandestine emails between certain scientists are only part of what exposed them. You of course couldn’t be bothered to read about it and investigate or were intentionally staying ignorant about what happened just to perpetuate the position that you and the libby-progs had taken, for fear of embarrassment. Now, you get to use Google and do your homework, which should have been done long ago. I am not going to do it for you, “BABE”, and as far as anything I write being “peer reviewed” it certainly wouldn’t be you or any of your dullards here. You could never measure up by a long shot to be my peer.

    Now, get busy! Become educated!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    It all most is.

  • Anonymous

    Sammy what town and state do you live in?

  • HP McLovincraft

    That’s what she said to you last night…

  • HP McLovincraft

    It’s not a degree. It’s a note from a doctor explaining your Down’s Syndrome.

    Also, I am not these people you keep claiming me to be. You are just paranoid, as well as retarded.

  • HP McLovincraft

    What a retard fucker you are. You have retard shit on your dick. Gross.

  • Liberty: Coercion’s Absence

    Since morality underpins liberty, we should remember that taking advantage of liberty’s opportunities obligates us to deal with resulting consequences.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    I not saying. Look I know you would not do anything but their been others who threaten me and my family so no I will not tell people where I live. Just take a look at people like HP McLovincraft for example if he found out where I lived he might do great harm to my family. He has not threaten me openly but the stalking of his is quite clear the guy has serous mental problems. It is the same reason I don’t post my Facebook page everywhere or use my real name like I did. I could tell you I live in PA but that is all the you are going to get from me. Trust me you would do the same if people threaten your family I know you love your family if you don’t your colder than I thought.

  • HP McLovincraft

    American’t Asslete. Spread ‘em.

  • HP McLovincraft

    They are mere billionaires who created the piTea Party, that’s all. Hoodwinked Fail.

  • HP McLovincraft

    Why do piTea Partying Teabaggers tend to be dipshits, racists, dumbasses and whiny cunts who can’t do anything but whine?

  • HP McLovincraft

    Yup. That is the reason Sam’s mom and sister are one person.

  • HP McLovincraft

    I think you mean ‘our’ instead of ‘are’(sic). 

  • HP McLovincraft

    FLAGGED!

  • Mr_TrueReality

    Why is there no acccounting for the CO2 produced by the recent forest fires (every year BTW) which have occurred in Nevada, CA, WY, and other areas across the globe?????
    CO2 is being produced no matter what man does…..nature’s CO2 production dwarfs man’s CO2 production.
    Will they next regulate and tax God and Nature?…..just try and collect you fools!!!!

  • Mr_TrueReality

    Ask yourself..why is there no acccounting for the CO2 produced by the recent forest fires (every year BTW) which have occurred in Nevada, CO, CA, WY, and other areas across the globe?????
    CO2 is being produced in massive amounts no matter what man does…..nature’s CO2 production dwarfs man’s CO2 production.Plus, CO2 is heavier than N2 and O2 which comprise the major componenents of our atmosphere, ergo….it settles toward the surface of the Earth where plantlife metabolizes it into O2 and cellulose. CO2 has been recorded to exist in higher concentractions at the 30-40 thousand ft regions of our atmosphere since the implimentation of jet engine travel (1943)…but still, the CO2 sinks to the surface and the global timberline hasn’t changed. CO2 driven global warming is indeed bogus science!!!! It is a colorless, odorless gas which therefore,cannot block infrared radiation (Heat)
    Will they next regulate and tax God and Nature?…..just try and collect you fools!!!!

  • Mr_TrueReality

    Oh A FLAG…I’ll bet she’s REALLY intimidated!!!! (sarchasm here).
    McLovincraft… Douche your brain and rebuild. Seriousy, otherwise 10 years from now you’ll be nowhere, man….
    “Nowhere man , please listen. you don’t know what your missin’ ”
    Mr TR

  • Mr_TrueReality

    Suckbrain, You’re a Numbskull, nimrod, gluehead, dumbshit, egghead, liberal douchebag, itellectual mouse, cochroach,…. I could go on but I’ll allow others to join in in the descriptive entries of just how ill advised readers of these posts are to heed ANY of your remarks!
    MR TR 

  • HP McLovincraft

    Understands Irony Fail.

    Ms. Dirty Sanchez only tattles on people who oppose her worldview. 

    Intellectual Honesty is not in her vocab.

    Is it in yours?

    (I’m talking about Intellectual Honesty, not cocks in assholes).

  • Cameron Vance

    Just leave us alone, you troll. Cthulhu is not ready to be released yet.

  • HP McLovincraft

    But the jizz in my nutsack is…thanx for the chin…..

  • Mr_TrueReality

    Obviously I am intellectually honest, I am honest in all respects… I am , after all is evaluated symbolically, Mr. “Is Real”.
    Does anyone get it as of yet???
    Mr TR

  • Anonymous

    Sweetheart, it’s obvious you don’t have a clue, when it comes to AGW..  But that’s exactly what the 1% wants. They want “simple-folk” like you, who don’t question anything.  Idiots that are willing to make fools out of themselves, by making stupid statements like you have. Thanks for proving my point!

  • Stephan Bruno

    I find it funny that we do 1 year with less then sauna type weather and you idiot republitards find that that is proof the climate change doesn’t exist. Fucking retards. 

  • Tory Quinton

     Lets not forget that this year arctic Ice ceased its decline and maintained a stead balance despite threats from our top climate scientists that the arctic Ice would continue to decline at an increasing rate. In 200 years historians will look back at our best and brightest scientific minds and compare them to Phrenologists. Smart ideas that were hopelessly wrong.

  • Anonymous

    How are ya brother these things are all put out there to keep peoples minds busy , always something other than the truth , it seems as though things are moving to ONE get on board or get on board ONE Ryan and I know you understand .God be with you. Jeff

  • greywolfrs

    Why don’t you come here and “help” me out? Coward.

  • greywolfrs

    Please, get your whole in front of the shotgun. do the whole country a favor.

  • greywolfrs

    Please, get your whole in front of the shotgun. do the whole country a favor.

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    Folks, HP’s what a libtard looks like. He’s a prime example of stupid. 

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    I am doing good I had my first interview in months.Their is a web site that I go to like minded people where it is policed to keep trolls out of it. It is pretty much a place where a Conservative can talk to like minded people in peace. http://theconservativepush.webs.com/

  • https://twitter.com/DMcNee52 Cracker LongHorn

    They all work in the Pollution Industry.   You see they don’t care about what they leave to their children.  They are all Non-Smoking Fishes living in a Fish Bowl called Earth.  They used to poop in their own drinking water.  They are not very smart.

  • https://twitter.com/DMcNee52 Cracker LongHorn

    And you struggle to explain your lack of intelligence.

    Boy, not you again.  So what is the opposite of intelligence?  Come on, Son, look at me when I ‘m talking to you.  I bet you think the answer is stoopid.

    That Boy is Dumb I say

  • Anonymous

    Hey that’s awesome i’m praying for you good luck I tried to register on that site but can’t seem to get it to let me register I sure would like to get away from disqus not completely but man sometimes it just drives me crazy I am pretty knew to all of this i’m 51 and just got my 1st computer about 5 yrs ago when Glenn Beck started on gbtv  I live way out in the country so maybe that has something to do with the trouble with getting signed in . I sure hope your friend will be ok I keep her in my prayers,Ryan did things ever work out for you and that young lady I don’t remember for sure but it seems like you told me she may have moved? if not how is that working out ? well brother I won’t keep ya  best of luck on the job prospect. God bless you have a good evening  Jeff

  • JRAR10390

    When talking about  global warming one looks at the history of climate.  Not over days or weeks or centuries but over millennia.  When put into the proper context fictitious theories such as global warming fall apart.  

  • Anonymous

    Sammy, I mention you and the snowlepord at the 22 minuet mark.  Enjoy!!!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oukun782Ly8&feature=youtu.be

  • Defend Liberty

    At every opportunity, each of us should take the opportunity to hone our intellectual excalibur: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0094KY878

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    Their is also another web site that does a lot of policing better than they do here. http://alfonzorachel.com/ As for signing in I didn’t have any trouble and like you I live out in the middle of no where. Don’t get me wrong I love it out here it just not great when it comes to internet services. As for that young lady she came out and told me she like someone else. I wish she would of told me a month before and saved us both from the awkwardness of it later but I guess she just wanted to protect my feelings so I can’t stay mad at her for that. Oh well at least now I know it would of never worked out because I always wanted a woman by my side who was always going to tell me truth strait up and while I still consider her a friend I will not date her because she was not honest with me from the start. I am one of these guys who wants the truth even if it hurts.

  • Anonymous

    I’m sorry it didn’t work out but let me tell you as a friend (I hope ) you sir have your head right were it should be with out trust you have nothing I did that and it was the worst time in my life 9 1/2 yrs of lies mistrust and she never could get a clue we had 4 children the 4th she took her life at birth we have 3 other kids that are all SAVED that was my doing. I have been with my 2nd wife for 18yrs now we have a son who is a real blessing . I just wanted to tell you this because I was a fool in my 1st marriage I lost my identity in her brother I just loved her to much and that became very dangerous and I almost didn’t get out. The Lord will send the right girl to you brother just never put her before God that’s when things get bad . Well in another note my son helped me get signed up on the other site and i’m all set now so i’ll let you be and look forward to talking to you there because I find Disqus as a forum that can pull one from the Lord i’m 51 and when I was a young man the things some of those folks wouldn’t have there teeth sad but true . God bless you Ryan thank you for telling me about the other site your brother in CHRIST     Jeff

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    Finely fame. LOL!

  • Anonymous

    Weather conditions change as a part of the ongoing process that is known as Earth.

    10,000 years ago man was still enduring the last active Ice Age period.  Indeed we are still in an Ice Age that began several million years ago.   Who caused it?  Who stopped it?  Imagine an Earth with no ice — it’s already happened.

    There are so many forces on such a massive scale at work on, within and outside the Earth that to blame man’s creation of “greenhouse gasses” for planetary doom is short-sighted, misleading and in some cases, manipulating.

    We would be much better off analyzing and preparing for inevitable near and long term geographical and meteorological changes rather than trying to stop or control them.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrbEIqFl_Q Sam Fisher

    Everyone been fooled by a woman granted not everyone got it as bad as you did and you becoming a Christian afterwards speaks well to your faith. After getting hurt a few times and actually finding a good girl at one point in my life I that got me to understand what a good relationship is supposed to look like. To bad she moved a few States away. I am shore just like God lead me to my last girlfriend he will lead me to my future wife just got to keep the faith.
    I seen that you got signed up the last time I was their. Talk to you some their but I am glad that you did go onto Disqus. It is bad in some ways as you mention but good when trying to find like minded people. It is nice for example to run into younger people that think like me and to know I am not the only one in my generation that is awake and to find a few in my area when joining facebook is priceless. the internet can be used for great evil or great good it all depends on the user.

  • Bertha W. Bailey

    my uncle got a new blue Mitsubishi Outlander SUV only from working part time off a macbook… more tips here►►►►►► DAY37.COM 

  • http://thefriendcenter.com/ Average Joe.

    Why do you feel a need to lie? Be specific.

  • Anonymous

    What will be  is in your future keep the faith and you can’t lose as we talk i’ll tell you some amazing things that have happened in my 51 yrs  God gave me one last chance (cancer) 22 yrs ago i’m glad to have met ya here so you are correct good or evil  is a choice we’ve made ours. Bless you Jeff

  • MariaSanchez

    Spammer

  • HP McLovincraft

    Boo Hoo. Maybe you could cry about it to Glenn Beck dot com. Little whiny bitch! LOL!

  • Jim

    The fact that CO2 is colorless only means that it does not block light in the visible spectrum. We would say that Nitrogen and Oxygen are colorless gasses as well, but we also know that the sky is blue. The sky is blue because those two gasses scatter the frequencies at the higher end of the visible spectrum and also scatter some right back into space. So, they seem colorless, but they do interact with light in a way that makes them not 100% colorless. Therefore, you have not given a good reason to assume that CO2 has no effect in the infrared region (just slightly too low of a frequency to be visible) by merely stating that it is a colorless gas. I don’t think it is necessary to discuss the irrelevance of its odorlessness. Additionally, forest fires do cause increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations, however, where there are forest fires, plant life will grow in its place and recapture CO2 back out of the atmosphere. That process creates a zero net contribution to the atmosphere. Where there were forest fires ten years ago, there has been a lot of plant growth in ten years that has absorbed a lot of CO2 out of the atmosphere. There is a balance of forest fires and plant regrowth which equates to a net zero increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration. This would only not be the case if there was a lot more forest fires than regrowth and therefore significantly more barren land than ten years ago. There are examples of man made forest fires in places like Brazil where they are clearing land for farming – and this is a significant contributor to the atmospheric increase in CO2 concentration from 250ppm pre industrial revolution to the 400ppm today. In this case, a lot of biomass is turned into CO2. The trees burned stored a lot more carbon then the amount that will be recaptured out of the atmosphere by the much smaller amount of biomass in, say a crop of soybeans. But, that is a one time addition, and is also a result of man.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mark.thoele.5 Mark Thoele

    Science is at best fickled. The earth is flat…oh wait the earth is round. The sun revolves around the earth….oh wait the earth revolves around the sun. Pluto is a planet…oh wait Pluto is not a planet….and on and on and on.