Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by 4 months, 4 weeks ago
    I could have posted the New Yellow Times article on this topic, but it was blatantly biased and presented again all the same false rubbish that the NYT brainwashed statist urinalists have foisted on the public repeatedly.
    Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary the NYT continues the manipulative, false narrative about human contribution to CC.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  exceller 4 months, 4 weeks ago
      "New Yellow Times"...great name!

      Just want to note that at least we all know what the NYT stands for and they are not apologizing for it or to what audience they cater.

      The WSJ, on the other hand, is masquerading as a conservative publication while more or less doing the same, with frequent hit jobs on the president, save a few sane journalist's presence like McGurn or Strassel. There are articles posted that had you not known you were reading the WSJ, you'd think it was the NYT.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    Even the Daily Mail, or writer Emily Goodwin, has a climate alarmist view in this article.

    There is no sensible description of William Happer, the Princeton prof. leading the panel. He has produced the caliber of work that is of Nobel winning standard.

    There is no mention of Turner, Soros, Steyer and gang who are the world's richest but a billionaire is named as 'ultra-conservative' solely due to opposing climate alarmism.

    Patrick Moore, who was identified by Fox News as a co-founder of Green Peace - although the organization said that is incorrect.
    Parick Moore is one of the founders of Greenpeace who left when the ideology of climate alarmism took over. The denial of his role and work by the current Greenpeace bosses, records, texts and photos altered, is textbook Stalinism.

    Losses by the US economy- could lose etc. No mention of the certain losses if nonsense ideology is followed.

    So, the article is bigoted, like many such, some truth can be got by careful reading. It is good to see the desperate attempts to promote "the science", but it is fraud. Thanks to ffa for posting.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 months, 3 weeks ago
      Correct on all observations, Lucky. +1
      The truth really could be spread if people (corporate advertisers) insisted by taking their business away from the statist liberal propaganda outlets. There aren't many CEOs brave enough to come out and make that point.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Solver 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    In order to fit their narrative, leftists have actively excluded a lot of facts, theories and people from their climate science. The Nazis had something called, German science. German science was their “true” science that was actively kept “pure”, without all those conflicting influences by “unpure” facts, theories or people, such as by the Jew Albert Einstein.

    The fact is that in its current leftist bent state, climate science is so corrupted that isn’t actual science.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    I got a big laugh recently when watching the pilot episode (in 1995) of the tv series Sliders.
    The subtle propaganda was pushing the global cooling "science" ;^)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  exceller 4 months, 3 weeks ago
      Well, when the global warmers were confronted with the factual evidence that temperatures are cooling, they were quick to point out (Al Gore, none else) that global cooling is part of global warming, e.g. that warming causes cooling.

      I think it is safe to leave them at that point.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  exceller 4 months, 4 weeks ago
    It is not a science.

    First thing you observe is the left claims there is "consensus" in scientists' findings.

    Science is not about consensus. To the contrary, it is about critical thinking by challenging accepted views and set ideas.

    Something college graduates sorely lack when taking their diploma to the next job.

    Global warming is the next best vehicle for the left to exert control over vast masses of the population.

    Al Gore made millions on it, buying a mansion in Mendocino County for $8 million.

    Biden challenged him recently, claiming it was him who started the global warming crusade. Another area where the swamp is competing for "leadership".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Stormi 4 months, 3 weeks ago
      So true. Science is about research, checking and rechecking facts as we know them, adjusting for new facts. It is not about grants, political manipulation, and selling an agenda - or should not be. About 1995, the UN started pushing the CO2 issue, later to say they no longer cared it their was warming, as long as people believed there was and they could control them. Thus, it was a political power play from the first. None of the current models factor in both the Sun cycles, which are what control weather, and the past due switching of the Earth magnetic poles, both of which point to cooling to extreme disastrous cooling.. Politicians need to stop the hoax, as they can control nothing of the weather or what is to come.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    All of the models that rely on projections of carbon dioxide fail validation, based on moving the start date back a century to see if they correctly model current conditions, and they do not. Models based on sun cycles pass validation, and they predict we're going to be entering a cooling cycle.

    Climate changers will often declare that 97% of climate scientists support global warming, but that figure is based on a flawed poll. The poll was sent to 3,000 scientists who had peer reviewed papers on climate change. After review, the pollsters discovered only about 120 of those papers even addressed human contributions to climate change, and of those, only 79 responded, with 75 agreeing that human actions were the main cause of climate change. So the declaration of 97% is based on the opinions of 75 scientists as representative of all climate scientists. By comparison, over 31,000 climate scientists signed a letter to the UN, saying that the UN's IPCC report greatly exaggerated the rate of climate change, and was unconvincing in its argument that draconian changes were absolutely necessary to prevent disaster.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    Gotta love the bias in the article. They start from the assumption that climate change is "settled science" and fact, when nothing could be further from the truth. We don't understand nearly as much about climate as we think we do but that doesn't matter because it isn't about science but the ideology of global control and tyranny. It's #science vs science.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    IMHO, all this hot climate hysteria needs a bucket of cold water tossed on it to bring it back to reality. Trump might be just the right guy needed at the cold spring pump to fill the bucket!

    The computerized extrapolations of suppositions of wild ass guesses being called "science" needs a good slap to reality. I've been writing code since 1972 and spent decades in the process controls field and some of the so called modeling "data that doesn't lie" being presented by these so called scientists and "Urinalists" (thanks for that one FFA!) is absurdly appalling.

    When you read this global warming hysteria just keep in mind the multi-billion dollar taxpayer funded weather forecasting service can't accurately get it right for next week, so what makes all these hysterical idiots think the forecast for the next decade is spot on? Actually, the decade of the dastardly date of doom has shifted into the future many times in my lifetime and the New Yellow Times (Thanks again, FFA!) has just shifted it to 2040 in spite of the all seeing bartender calling for 2032. Whatever...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 4 months, 4 weeks ago
    He also needs to ramp up responsible conversations on magnetic reversals. It's a much more important conversation.

    Maybe declassify knowledge of all the tunnels and underground facilities we keep hearing about also.

    If Conscious Humans are to survive the next earthly catastrophe we have to make sure the extreme left and all the other unwashed idiots do not survive. It is my opinion, we cannot fix stupid and the last thing mankind needs is a lot of dead weight holding us back from a civilizational restart.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  25n56il4 4 months, 4 weeks ago
    Okay guys! What's a 'urinalists'? Do you mean 'uninanalysist?' Is there such a thing?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 months, 4 weeks ago
      In the days when self-respecting newspaper writers actually considered reality before putting words to paper they were called 'journalists.'
      Now since their words often more properly belong in a urinal, I call them 'urinalists.'
      It's similar to the current name of the Georgia capital's newspaper, Atlanta Urinal and Constipation.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  exceller 4 months, 4 weeks ago
        There is no profession like a journalist any more.

        Wonder what are they being educated on while in college?

        A journalist would never compromise himself/herself by presenting the lies and fake news in the name of generating revenue, like CNN staff are doing.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo