No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Make up your mind, you indecisive eggheads! The scientific controversy over global warming is paralyzed as climate scientists are gridlocked in debate:

http://www.jamespowell.org/files/newpiechart.png

James Powel writes:

I found 2,258 articles, written by a total of 9,136 authors….Only one article, by a single author in the Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, rejected man-made global warming.

But we're talking about a RUSSIAN scientist, and everybody knows those guys are freakish super humans who can play 20 simultaneous games of chess blindfolded while designing super weapon doomsday devices. One Russian scientist is worth more than thousands of normal scientists (the same phenomenon applies to their mail-order brides as well).

He then goes into ancient history, acting like people who liked the sound of Milli Vanilli and Vanilla Ice are trustworthy sources of information:

My previous study, of the peer-reviewed literature from 1991 through Nov. 12, 2012, found 13,950 articles on “global warming” or “global climate change.” Of those, I judged that only 24 explicitly rejected the theory of man-made global warming.

Just look at that liberal bias! Scientists have made no attempt to make their peer-reviewed studies and evidence match up with public opinion, the elitists.

And after all the money so generously donated by the Fossil Fuel industry, conservatives billionaires and right-wing foundations, scientists refuse to make studies to support prove our opinions. The ingratitude is staggering.

It also proves Big Science is socialist, to be ignoring the market incentives provided so generously by little oil. The rest of us hustle and do what it takes to make a buck, but not those smug nerds, comfortable in their labs:

From Scientific American (a contradiction in terms): And I thought science has supposed to be hyper-competetive, with every study being ripped into by peer reviewers like a feeding frenzy, with contrarians, nitpickers, brilliant cranks, and moot debates just because scientists like to argue so much they'll just make up disagreements as if there aren't enough already.

Most of all, where is the nitpickery? Normally, you can't say more than a sentence to a liberal egghead know-it-all without getting "corrected" or nitpicked on some detail. We know the arguments are out there, here's a list of 136 arguments against climate change.

This isn't just climate science, by the way. I once offered a good sum of money to any scientist who could make a peer-reviewed study proving my ex-wife a bitch, and another one proving that God had answered my prayer that she suffer brain damage, but none were interested. And I offered a LOT of money. I think scientists lack business sense because they've been brainwashed by socialism.

The ingratitude is shocking. After all the money so generously donated by the Fossil Fuel industry, conservatives billionaires and right-wing foundations, scientists refuse to make studies to support other people's opinions.

I think those nerds have watched to many science fiction movies. Like this "polar vortex" they just ripped that off from The Day After Tomorrow. And here's a list of talking points on the subject by - get this - a science fiction author! A guy whose job is to tell stories filled with monsters and other worlds and larger-than life heroes and impossible stuff!

"the War on Science is part of a much wider effort to destroy public trust in every "smartypants caste" -- from school teachers, journalists, medical doctors and attorneys to professors, civil servants and skilled labor. (Name a center of intellect that's exempt!) But nowhere is it more relentless than by savaging the one group in society that's unarguably among the smartest and best educated."

Just listen to that arrogance! "My facts are better than your opinion!"

The supposedly stupid climate scientists are in many cases the very same people who improved the Weather Forecast from a 4 hour joke (remember those days?) to a ten day projection so useful that you plan vacations around it.

Nonsense! Just last summer I was told by the weather forecast that there was a "50% chance of rain", so I put on half my rain gear. Well, what came out of the sky was 100% rain, let me tell you.

If they proved titanically competent in one area, don't they deserve some benefit of the doubt in a closely related field? Perhaps more than TV shills who work for coal czars and Saudi princes?

But of course Glenn Beck knows more than they do.

Just because someone is paid by Saudi Arabia doesn't make them any less entitled to their own facts.

Really? They'd lie for a $50,000 grant? All of them? Even the vast majority who have no such grants and work in other (related) fields?

...How about the major prizes and grants offered by coal companies and petro moguls, for anti-Climate Change "research"? Huge offers, often much bigger than those petty little grants from EPA, NASA, NOAA or private foundations. Why don't those coal-co offers draw serious, top-rank climate scholars, if they are all such money grubbers?

Sounds like class-envy from someone who has to scrape and beg for tiny research grants. You scientists have nobody to blame for your poverty but yourselves - pull yourself up by your bootstraps, find an Oil billionaire to work for, QUIT WHINING AND START WINNING!

And how does it feel parroting the exact same lines as the Tobacco Industry pushed, when they cried "the jury is still out" about the health effects of smoking, and Tobacco shills claimed that anti-smoking scientists were all in it to become millionaires off grants from the Heart Association? Have you no memory? No shame?

But cigarette smoke IS healthy, it's just that it's also pleasurable and God punishes those who enjoy worldly pleasures. I also offered money to scientists willing to prove this, but again the socialists couldn't make a deal.

More to the point, if you are so sure about this slander - that all the scientists backing Climate Change are grubbing for grants - HOW ABOUT OFFERING IT AS A BET? Wagers are on the table. Free money, if you're sure! Follow the money, prove this and collect the bets. Only a coward would refuse. (Hint: when offered wagers, these folks always, always run away. Try it and watch them scurry for cover!)

Gambling is a sin! See how clear the satan-nerd connection is, when nerds can only defend themselves by openly advocating for sin?

Even if HGCC proved to be an utter myth, it would still be worthwhile to bend major efforts toward efficiency and new energy, if only to wean ourselves off dependence upon foreign oil and filthy coal. An accomplishment that George W. Bush swore would be his top priority... and that he sabotaged at every turn. (Hmm... look at his family friends and guess why.)

Notice how liberals hate families. They're just natural-born backstabbers, unable to understand that normal people side with their own families. They even invent new words, like "nepotism" and "cronyism", which make no sense to loyal, non-backstabbers.

Of and in the end, it doesn't matter if thousands of scientists say global warming is real because they can all be over-ruled with one study.

That study is THE BIBLE, produced by ALMIGHTY GOD.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Atheistic babel... .... .....





Matthew 7:1

Judge not, that ye be not judged

2 Timothy 4:3-4

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Why lose time with pseudo-scholars? the only absolute and irrevocable truth can be found in the KJV, all else is, if GOD is willing, an approximation.

And of course most of it is just satan's lies.

PRAISE THE LORD!

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Hey Scientists, wanna hear my research:

I found 1 article, written by a total of 1 author….One article, by a single author in the Bible, rejected man-made global warming.

I say one study from the LORD ALMIGHTY trumps any so called "evidence". And what puny evidence it is, look at this "proof" of melting ice:



Obviously the ice is just sinking under the weight of all the penguins. To fix that problem all you have to do is bring back penguin-clubbing.

Grand Haven Tribune:

Pine bark beetle that in years past were killed off during harsh winters have now infected about 45 million trees in western states, leading to more severe forest fires, posing flood risks and threatening the timber industry, Vilsack said.

Look at this nonsense - bugs start fires? What, are they smokers or something? No, it's reefer-mad hippies losing track of their "joints" that are causing all those fires, obviously.

In the absence of adequate forecasting and disaster assistance, he said, an October snowstorm wiped out entire cattle operations in the Dakotas.

Read the Bible! Jesus kills farm animals because he put demons in them: Mark 5:1-20, Matthew 8:28-34, Luke 8:26-39

http://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared...nfo:o:156e.jpg

"You killed my pigs! My family will starve!"

"Suck it up, whiner."

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Very informative and I have to agree with everything you said. Everyone knows bugs aren't smart enough to light a fire. :wacko: They must really be getting desperate in their attempts to scare people with the liberal media if they are starting to jump to crazy conclusions like this now. Its really rather sad.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

I wish it was desperation. No, they really are managing to impose Satan's will upon America:

President Obama announced Tuesday that the government will tighten fuel efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, part of an ongoing effort to use his executive authority to address climate change and spur domestic manufacturing...

“Don’t make small plans; make big plans,” the president told a crowd of about 275 people, including environmental leaders and trucking industry officials. “And anybody who had dire predictions for the auto industry, said we couldn’t do it, manufacturers couldn’t bring jobs back to America — every time they say that, they’re proven wrong. Every time somebody says you can’t grow the economy while bringing down pollution, it’s turned out they’ve been wrong.”

This is the second time Obama has mandated a cut in fuel consumption and carbon emissions from medium- and heavy-duty trucks, a category that includes large pickup trucks, school buses [he's targeting your CHILDREN!] and 18-wheel tractor-trailers.

An earlier rule, finalized in September 2011, [coincidence???] improved the fleet’s fuel efficiency by 9 percent to 23 percent, with the largest trucks showing the most improvement. The Obama administration estimates that those standards, which applied to the model years 2014 through 2018, cost the industry $8 billion but will save truck users $50 billion in fuel costs over the lifetimes of the vehicles.

[...]

...many truck suppliers have embraced the idea of reducing carbon emissions.

Phil Byrd, chairman of American Trucking Associations, said in an interview that he spoke to engine manufacturers and that “they are very upbeat” about their ability to make additional improvements in fuel efficiency....

Byrd, who met with Obama before the speech, said the president “assured us we would continue to have a voice in this process.”

S. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, wrote in an e-mail that “the juxtaposition between the positions of the motor vehicle and power sectors on the president’s climate action plan is startling.”

GOD HATES TRUCKERS! Bunch of buttcrack-showing, trucker-bomb littering, truckstop-infesting, road-clogging ISLAMOFASCISSTS!

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Unless God commands me to do otherwise, I feel compelled to offer my personal testimony to those poor lost women.

Amen. :innocent:

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Are they talking about trading jobs? Because their hooters are smaller than HIS.

Also, did I mention that orange is my favorite color? Well, it's in the top ten, anyway.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

I think the problems with all these "scientists" is that they never leave home or even look out of a window. They keep staring at their computer monitors and their scientific papers having no clue whatsoever what is actually happening in the world.

If they would leave their houses just once, they would notice we are having the coldest winter ever and they would stop with spreading all this All Gore global warming hoax propaganda nonsense.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Those are perverted lezbeans - pretending they have man bits. Look at those black things they have dangling between their legs! Disgusting.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Amen Brother Cranky. It was 58° in South Florida this morning!

:eek:

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

HAH! I knew it! All that global warming trash is liberal propaganda.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Of course it is! If it weren't, why would we have the coldest winter in a long time in the US? And please don't tell me that global warming causes colder winters, because that's just garbage!

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Where do I even start with this nonsense:

Scientists have discovered a new type of virus in 30,000-year-old permafrost and managed to revive it, producing an infection.

It's "new", yet it's also 30,000 years old - 24,000 years before God created the universe! :lol: :wacko:

Fortunately, the new virus, named Pithovirus sibericum, infects amoebas and is not harmful to humans....its ability to become infectious again after so many millenniums is a warning...

"The revival of such an ancestral amoeba infecting virus … suggests that the thawing of permafrost either from global warming or industrial exploitation of circumpolar regions might not be exempt from future threats to human or animal health," they wrote in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

So, if climate change is real, we might see amebas get infected? No, obviously God smote that ameba with plague for its sin. I mean, they reproduce asexually, which is basically masturbation.

The researchers suggest that looking for amoeba-infecting viruses in permafrost is an "inexpensive and safe way to realistically assess the threat" posed by pathogens that might be released from ancient frozen soils and sediments as permafrost melts, either due to global warming or industrial activities such as mining and drilling.

Here's a way to neutralize the threat: nuke Siberia, sterilizing it and producing lots of nice water-features in the form of craters. Join us in prayer here.

Scripture: Germunism is a lie, Plagues are sent by God:

For now I will stretch out my hand, that I may smite thee and thy people with pestilence; and thou shalt be cut off from the earth.

- Exodus 9:15

The LORD shall make the pestilence cleave unto thee, until he have consumed thee from off the land, whither thou goest to possess it.

- Deuteronomy 28:21

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

With the climate debate such an indecisive quagmire, you can trust the Pentagon to jump right in:

The nation's military leadership is in unified agreement that climate change is real, and also that it poses a clear and present danger to the troops.

The Pentagon's thinking is revealed plainly and publicly in its own 2014 Quadrennial Review, which features no fewer than eight direct, specific, and unambiguous evaluations of climate change as it relates to geopolitics and military strategy.

Climate change poses another significant challenge for the United States and the world at large. As greenhouse gas emissions increase, sea levels are rising, average global temperatures are increasing, and severe weather patterns are accelerating. These changes, coupled with other global dynamics, including growing, urbanizing, more affluent populations, and substantial economic growth in India, China, Brazil, and other nations, will devastate homes, land, and infrastructure.

So turn them into shrinking, fleeing to the hills, impoverished populations. That's what we pay you all those tax dollars for - for you to bomb them into the stone age. So get off your butts!

Climate change may exacerbate water scarcity and lead to sharp increases in food costs.

Water scarcity will be the results of the OCEANS BEING TURNED INTO BLOOD: Revelation 8:8 Revelation 16:3 No point in trying to thwart God's will.

The pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world. These effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions – conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence.

The impacts of climate change may increase the frequency, scale, and complexity of future missions, including defense support to civil authorities, while at the same time undermining the capacity of our domestic installations to support training activities...

Why, will the navy run out of ocean? :wacko: I mean, first they're saying that deployments will be frequent, huge, and bloody, and next they're saying they're going to be lacking practise. Huh? Never heard of on-the-job-training?

....The Pentagon has concluded that climate change will likely breed more terrorism, more unrest, and more conflict.

That's not climate science, that's call reading the Bible: Matthew 24:6 Revelation 6:4

This is the final straw: it's time to completely privatize the military.

http://afp.google.com/media/ALeqM5hr...uKHKuA?size=s2

The socializing of the military was one of the first steps of the liberal plot to kill Christianity with "the enlightenment".

The socialized military failed to find the masses of WMD in Iraq, and are whitewashing the massive collapse of morality causes by women in uniform, as well as the end of D.A.D.T.

The military produces drugged-up welfare-queen, democrat-voting veterans. No wonder the democrats love them so much.

Still don't belive me? Their highest honor is a medal in the shape of an upsidedown pentagram, the same symbol used by Satanists:

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/medal-of-honor-010.jpghttp://data2.whicdn.com/images/30827756/large.png

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Just look at this circular logic:

The first thing you have to do, as hard as it seems, is divorce yourself from your political party's opinion...People are split 50/50 between political parties, and they can't all be right; so your odds are 50/50 that your party is wrong. Here's how to better your odds of being right.

Instead, get your information from the people who study climate change full time. They don't have all the answers either, but they understand them a lot better than any politician. On any science question, go with the relevant experts in that field, and you'll be right far more often than you'll be wrong.

If you're distrustful of scientists because you think they've been paid off to do bad research because of global warming's economic impacts, then fine; exclude the researchers whom you've found to have a conflict of interest. The vast majority of climate researchers are grad students and post docs. They're in every country, from every walk of life; some with salaries, some with grants; working for academia, business, and government.

If you distrust any filter, then simply go straight to the source. Don't listen to engineers, pundits, politicians, or scientists in other fields. Don't ever let your politics determine your science.

Can science be trusted? I dunno, let's ask scientists!

That's as absurd as Muslims who tell us to believe the Koran is written by God, and can prove it by quoting....The Koran. :wacko:

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Who needs liberal-bias climate scientists anyway? We conservatives have OUR OWN climate science:

http://wp.production.patheos.com/blo...TrumpCloud.png

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Global warming implies that there is a globe, and that's a lie. THE EARTH IS FLAT.

Then, discussing the warming becomes secondary.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Of course! All we have to do is expand The Great Wall Of Trump to to the four corners of the Earth, in order to trap cold air that otherwise would fall over the edge. We all know that cold air sinks, but with a high enough wall it will be trapped here with us.

If we want to get really ambitious, we could completely control the climate by adding fans and drains and pumps. Too cold? Open some gates, turn on the fans, and the excess cold air gets blown out. Sea level rising? Pump some water over the edge.

The fact that scientists are not proposing this system proves that they don't actually care, they are just trying to push some sinister globalist plot.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Right on. This is the United States of America, the can-do country. If there is a problem, too warm, fix it. Liberals enjoy sitting around and whining about a little perspiration. This whole global warming thing is much to do about nothing.

Re: No scientific consensus on Global Warming: still tied at 9,136 to 1
 

Climate Doomsayers get their predictions wrong again! They predicted that Australia would have unprecedented wildfires in 2020:



WRONG! The latest wildfires actually started January 29st, 2019.