Tens of Thousands Of Scientists Declare Climate Change A Hoax

30,000 scientists declare man-made climate change a hoax

A staggering 30,000 scientists have come forward confirming that man-made climate change is a hoax perpetuated by the elite in order to make money. 

One of the experts is weather channel founder, John Coleman, who warns that huge fortunes are being made by man-made climate change proponents such as Al Gore.

Natural News reports:

In a recent interview with Climate Depot, Coleman said:

“Al Gore may emerge from the shadows to declare victory in the ‘global warming’ debate if Hillary Clinton moves into the White House. Yes, if that happens and the new climate regulations become the law of the land, they will be next to impossible to overturn for four to eight years.”

Climate change proponents remain undeterred in their mission, ignoring numerous recent scientific findings indicating that there has been no warming trend at all for nearly two decades.

Al Gore’s dire predictions of the melting of polar ice on a massive scale have proved to be completely false. In fact, in 2014 – a year that was touted as being “the hottest ever” in the Earth’s history – there were record amounts of ice reported in Antarctica, an increase in Arctic ice, and record snowfalls across the globe.

Debunking the “97 percent” lie

On top of those “inconvenient truths,” the White House’s assertion that 97 percent of scientists agree that global warming is real has been completely debunked. Several independently-researched examinations of the literature used to support the “97 percent” statement found that the conclusions were cherry-picked and misleading.

More objective surveys have revealed that there is a far greater diversity of opinion among scientists than the global warming crowd would like for you to believe.

From the National Review:

“A 2008 survey by two German scientists, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, found that a significant number of scientists were skeptical of the ability of existing global climate models to accurately predict global temperatures, precipitation, sea-level changes, or extreme weather events even over a decade; they were far more skeptical as the time horizon increased.”

Other mainstream news sources besides the National Review have also been courageous enough to speak out against the global warming propaganda – even the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed piece in 2015 challenging the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) pseudoscience being promulgated by global warming proponents.

And, of course, there are the more than 31,000 American scientists (to date) who have signed a petition challenging the climate change narrative and 9,029 of them hold PhDs in their respective fields. But hey, Al Gore and his cronies have also ignored that inconvenient truth, as well.

Many of those scientists who signed the petition were likely encouraged to speak out in favor of the truth after retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist John L. Casey revealed that solar cycles are largely responsible for warming periods on Earth – not human activity.

Al Gore and cronies continue getting richer from the global warming hoax

But the global warming crowd continues to push their agenda on the public while lining their pockets in the process. If you’re still inclined to believe what Al Gore has to say about global warming, please consider the fact that since he embarked on his crusade, his wealth has grown from $2 million in 2001 to $100 million in 2016 – largely due to investments in fake “green tech” companies and the effective embezzlement of numerous grants and loans.

You might want to take all of this information into serious consideration before casting your vote in the November election.

  • Painted Pagliacci Of Perfidy

    Wow. This reads like an Onion piece. Make a friend.

  • yukovalis

    Paid for by Exxon. No seriously, this whole thing was debunked as a scam by Exxon Oil. Climate change is very real, and anyone who says different is either being paid by big oil, or is ignorantly listening to someone who was.

    • http://www.zdevelopers.net Brian Zwart

      Well…. no matter how real you believe it to be…. I’m not going to run out and buy a prius over it.

      • yukovalis

        and that is fine. It isn’t just about the individual doing something other then being mindful. It is up to the government and companies to research greentech compared to using oil. Even if you don’t believe the serious damage we have done and are constantly doing, like it or not, oil is going to vanish. Once it does we will be stuck with machines that won’t work anymore.

        • http://www.zdevelopers.net Brian Zwart

          You know…. I don’t believe the conspiracy theorists on Infowars anymore than I believe the ones on here?

        • http://www.zdevelopers.net Brian Zwart

          Actually I’d be a lot happier if you can get the price of gas lowered.

          • Matt in the Box

            My Prius gets 21.4km per litre.
            I personally lowered the price of gas

          • Judy Martin

            i love that i can sneak up on people in parking lots..its so quiet…lol..mines named sea buscuit

          • Mister_Jim

            Speak in terms people understand, I don’t feel like using a calculator to do the conversion. How many miles per gallon is that? How much did it cost you to accomplish that milestone? I have a 1988 Buick that cost me $700.00 and my yearly maintenance is less than $300.00 and I get anywhere from 24 – 33 miles per gallon. I drive fewer than 5000 miles per year. Does the fuel savings of your Prius justify the difference between my average monthly cost of $25.00 and your monthly payment on that Prius? My yearly fuel cost of less than $500.00 is less than two payments on your Prius. I have better things to spend my money on than the political hype of “saving the planet” from something that is far beyond the control of we mere mortal humans.

        • Johnpd

          Oil will NOT vanish:
          http://www.viewzone.com/abioticoilx.html
          Oil is proven to be manufactured in the Earth under heat & pressure. They’ve lied to you: it’s NOT a fossil fuel. HEHEHEHE

          • yukovalis

            that old story? First of all, that isn’t proven. It is a theory. Second, the isotopic profile of oil is proven to be from fossils, while it may or may not have been slightly added to by your theory. Third, even if some oil is created through that process, it won’t be near enough to supply the world, and what we use each day. To use a metaphor, that would be like trying to fill a gas tank from the oil on your skin. Which is all the more reason to cut down on the stuff, for our habitat.

        • Ziggy Eckardt

          Yes, in about 300 years we may come to the end of our oil supplies…
          Believe it or not, 100 years ago horse manure was a big city problem. Horses were the prime source of power for transportation. There were huge piles of manure. They stank, smelled, attracted rats who, in turn, spread diseases.
          Ford’s Model T took care of that little pollution problem. At the time nobody was stupid enough to ask Mr. Ford to design a jet engine to move today’s Boeing 777!
          In real life, nobody sets out to destroy Kodak. Digital technology was better and doing Kodak in was an unintended by-product.
          Viagra was not invented for the purpose it is used for…
          In 200 years time we will be so much more knowledgeable and it will be a lot easier to solve that problem. Trust me. We still have a lot to learn!
          (Even about climate change…)

          • Judy Martin

            aahhh a voice of reason. we old farts have see a lot of “the end is near” shriekers in our day. we have learned to either ignore them or turn up the radio

          • Matt in the Box

            If you think Ziggy’s the voice of reason you have been seriously misinformed; bat shit crazy misinformed.

      • Judy Martin

        hey now…i love my prius..its so quite in the electric cycle that
        i get to sneak up on people in parking lots…and i can drive from illinois to vegas on less than $100.00 in gas..its fun

    • The Thinker

      Climate Change IS real, and no one thinks otherwise, the ice ages can really change minds

      What is not real, is humans are causing it!

      CAGW is a scam.

      • yukovalis

        Picture a lake, nice and pretty. Many lakes are millions of years old. In fact the oldest lake is what some 25 million years old. How difficult would it be for humans to utterly destroy it? a few dozen barrels of oil here and there would do considerable damage, which nature itself couldn’t fix. This is much the state of our ozone. It doesn’t take long to damage something. so since we contributed 10 fold what natural c02 emissions were there, I’d say yes we are very much a cause.

        • Johnpd

          What sh1te you spout. One volcano in a few hrs can spout more CO2 than mankind has since 1950, when man is supposed to have been causing, first warming, then when that didn’t happen, climate change. HAHAHAHAHA
          Read Prof. Ian Plimer’s excellent book: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science

          • yukovalis

            aww isn’t that cute, you are trying to quote from some non-sourced best seller book. Honestly the thing was more full of theory then actual scientific understanding. Here how about we look to people in the field who actually measure this stuff? Like maybe the CDIAC? It is reported that volcano and trapped co2 releases up to 300 million tonnes a year. Humans on the other hand due to burning of fossil fuels release up to 30 BILLION tonnes a year. Now, do the math. So keep laughing like a jester.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Then why did Mother Nature not respond and raise the temperature as predicted? When Ford produces a car and stepping on the gas does not move it, they cannot afford to sit back for 19 years and hope like hell there will be stupid people to buy the thing anyway… It’s back to the drawing board. Rethink until it works.
            By the way, the sun’s actions and global temperatures are a much better match. But there is no money in that one for Al Gore…

        • anthony cortez

          but what about the natural oil springs in lakes and oceans are those ecological disasters?

          • yukovalis

            Not sure you understand the point I was trying to make. My point is that it doesn’t take long to destroy something. We could easily have done the damage to the ozone that we are very much doing.

        • Ziggy Eckardt

          Green house operators know that their crops grow best when the CO2 levels are 4 times higher than what some politicians, but not scientists, call “dangerous”…

    • Mister_Jim

      If you look at my previous posts you’ll see that I agree wholeheartedly that “climate change” is indeed real. It’s the “Man Made” qualifier that the liberals are using to bilk money from any and every possible source that I’m calling bullshit. It was obviously climate change that brought about the great ice age, how much did humans and the Industrial Revolution have to do with that? It was also obviously climate change that brought on the end of the great ice age. How influential were humans on that event?
      Facts are facts, distortion is distortion, deception is deception and ignorance is ignorance. Greedy liberals distort facts to deceive ignorant people. Ignorance isn’t bad, it’s simply a lack of knowledge. (OK it is bad in some instances, like when people are ignorant of how to maneuver in traffic and cause problems with traffic flow because they don’t know the rules of changing lanes or negotiating a four way stop).
      What is really bad is when some people use other people’s ignorance for social, political and financial gain.

      • yukovalis

        First of all, BOTH sides of politics distort facts to suit their own needs. Republicans and Democrats, conservative and liberal. The one thing that holds some truth is the scientific measure. The people whos job it is to actually measure our co2 footprint, and can compare it to the other people whos job to research climate change through history. Those people I believe, and it is those people who are saying man made damage to the climate is happening. Out of all the published and peer-reviewed reports 97% say man is a huge impact on climate. Yes the climate has changed before, but it has not ever been this bad.

        Picture a pristine lake that has sat there untouched for millions of years. It is clean and pure. Man can pollute and destroy it in under a day. It does NOT take long to damage something. If you can picture every single car and smoke stack in the USA alone, their pipes all tied together facing the sky, then you can imagine the MASSIVE amount of damage we are doing.

  • Clay Cromer

    Global warming is bull $}{!+ & you guys are fools to believe it.

    • Ena Kana

      Wow you are dumb

      • Grog618

        What an intelligent response.

        • Technerd

          Observations can sometime seem unintelligent until you realize they’re true

      • anthony divjak

        please replace the words *you are* with *I am* and You would make sense……And more Ctrails to You……

  • Matt in the Box

    This article is total shit.

    Who is dumb enough to believe this rubbish?

    Manipulating stupid people by lying to them to push an ideological barrow is evil. Yourneswire.com is shit.

    Vote Blue the whole way down the ballot.

    Keep fuckwit Republicans out of power.

    Global warming is basic physics. If you’re too dumb to understand, then leave it up to the experts. They’re called climatologists.

    • Sally Ban Geoengineering Parke

      Geoengineering is causing climate change. Co2 is NOT a pollutant and is NOT the problem and that is basic physics!!! Aluminium, Barium and Sulphur are being used to deliberately change the climate to perpetuate the global warming HOAX!!

      • Matt in the Box

        You’re brave. On a post where I say “manipulating stupid people” you want to come out and show that you have no grasp of objective reality, no understanding of scientific truth, and you base your thinking on bullshit internet memes?

        Yeah good one. You should get the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2017.

        I reiterate; If you’re too dumb to understand, then leave it up to the experts.

        • anthony divjak

          If you are an expert then we are dead meat hahahahhahaaa

      • CAFM

        Precisely!!!

      • Ena Kana

        Sally Ban you are a nutcase, and I’m not completely sure how brains such as yours have such a hard time processing reality. CO2 is an insulating agent; did you get that? I said CO2 is an insulating agent. Still don’t comprehend logical information? I said: CO2 holds heat you lizard brain.

      • Ziggy Eckardt

        How come I never heard one of our pilots or their friends got hired by those who do the Aluminum, Barium, Sulphur thing? Do you know any truck drivers who drive mountains of this stuff to hidden airports in the wilderness? By the way, I only worked for an airline for 35 years and even discussed an UFO incident with one of our crews. However, nobody ever got a glimps into climate seeding…

        • anthony divjak

          yup and the pilots and crews newer got sick in the air when they run into pockets of Ctrails????

          read much news lately?

      • anthony divjak

        Thank You Sally! You are the voice of reason in this *scientific* muddle. One should never loose sight of real causes of world wide sickness that is on increase. It is all the result of the Ctrails being kept of the topic in forums world wide.
        This is the real part of *man made* climate change all the rest is and always was of natural origin!

    • Johnpd

      Climatologist drtimball.com has called the hoax.
      Put overpopulation in his search box if you want to find one reason for the scam.

      • Matt in the Box

        You gullible fool. If you’re bouncing around from one right wing denialist blog to another then you’re cherry picking. How about reading some credible science papers instead? Will that burst your little bubble. Objective truth matters. Perpetuating falsehoods is lying. John, don’t be a liar.

        http://www.desmogblog.com/dr-tim-ball-the-lie-that-just-wont-die

        • Ziggy Eckardt

          Yes, Matt. Your link is exactly what I thought it might be. Ad honimen! Not a word about the evidence.
          During one afternoon I turned down a person who had the papers from a university that he had taken 3 years of French. He did not speak French. An hour later I hired a fellow who had moved to Montreal, worked as a dishwasher until he spoke enough French to work as busboy, then waiter. He spoke French! I do not have a single paper to prove to you that I speak Dutch. But I do!

          • Matt in the Box

            FFS.

            Go with just the facts then:

            http://www.skepticalscience.com/

            And not calling your favourite lying little fuckwit anything at all.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            I ignored your limited means of expressing yourself and started to read the “sceptical science”. Up to the spot:
            “carbon pollution”. Sorry. Nothing scientific to see there. Don’t you agree?

          • Matt in the Box

            The klaxons are sounding. The searchlights lock on. We have an idiot here.

            I refer you back to http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

            Don’t say another word til you read and understand, and I mean all of it. If you can’t have the good grace to do that, then I will have to ignore you as an incredible freak of rudeness and dumbitude,

            Read each one (even set to simpleton level), soak them in, understand them, and then you might have the smallest bit of a reason to be listened to (but only if you’ve changed your tune.) You get it, Ziggy? Your position is completely untenable in the3 light of evidence, and if you don’t think so, then guess who’s wrong, you or the evidence? Don’t waste my time again Ziggy.

            No more dumb arguments. No right wing memes crafted for the gullibles without bullshit detectors. No more, “oh but”. Understand the basics and then STFU.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Your limited capacity to communicate makes it clear that you have, obviously, overdosed on the KoolAid. For those others still interested in the subject and not having wasted their time on what Matt in the Box considers science, let me assure you, that his link is pre-school, shall we call it of Dr. Szeuss quality? Totally amusing.

            I have followed people such as Tim Ball, Ian Clark and Patrick Moore. Not being a scientist myself I have asked people to debunk their CO2 evidence. During the past 8 years I have received many replies of the Matt-in-the-Box calibre. Nothing that resembles science.
            Patrick Moore’s presentation is embedded in the following text, near the bottom:
            https://gseine.wordpress.com/2016/06/18/end-self-censorship-on-the-carbon-dioxide-debate/

          • Matt in the Box

            Sorry. You are incapable of telling between truth and bullshit, and I asked you to be polite enough to read and understand before commenting again. So why don’t you stop lying to yourself? If you do not understand climatology 101 then you cannot have an opinion on climatology. You can pretend to, but it is just proof of your intellectual poverty.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Can you believe it? This moron sends links which begin with a picture of the liar-in-charge-of-the-White-House, followed by Bernie Saunders and believes that he is onto something scientific… That’s called propaganda!

          • Matt in the Box

            There is something called objective truth and you don’t have a handle on it. Don’t blame me if I point out that your beliefs are bullshit. I am just the messenger. You might like to pretend that your contrarian views have worth, but they don’t. Those scientists are right, and you are a fool.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            What’s your message? Listen to Dr. Obama?

          • Matt in the Box

            The message is that yournewswire.com is full of liars, they spread disinformation and if you believe a word they say then you are incredibly stupid.

            Climate change is real. Don’t let right wing lying fuckwits tell you what to think.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Yes, Einstein. The climate is changing. Has been doing it for a long time. I can’t help it that you found a link that’s full of liars. I’ve never heard of yournewswire.com and, coming from you I won’t waste my time exploring. The previous 2 were plain “green’ propaganda.

          • Matt in the Box

            See that “you have no handle on objective truth thing” above?

            I, and scientific orthodoxy are right, and you are a gullible fool.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            …and I happen to find myself in the company of 30,000 scientists!
            Your company does not look appealing, does it now?

          • Matt in the Box

            No, thicko. This is a zero quality article, that only the stupid and the ill-educated are taken in by.

            I know I am in a pointless argument with a school student and probably a C student at best, but I’ll give you some handy hints if you want to succeed in life.

            Lose the attitude. The partisan warrior stuff just makes you look dumb.

            Learn enough so you know when someone is bullshitting you. At the moment you’re clueless on this.

            There are two great successes you might get to do in life, solving mathematical proofs and getting laid. You’re unlikely to achieve either, so get into comic books. You won’t have real life friends, but you can have some imaginary ones.

            And go back to http://www.skepticalscience.com/
            Or http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
            Or try https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90CkXVF-Q8M

            or https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/energy-environment-climate/

            And if you are struggling at digesting and understanding them, then remember there is something wrong with you, and not with the science.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            It is very tempting to call you names, the way you do. However, it is even more fun to show others how “off” your assumptions are.
            I am 82 years old. Before coming to Canada I spent almost 8 years working on ships on the high seas. This included 2 tankers and several cruise ships. I had just turned 16 when I found myself in the company of a world renown whaling expert while we went to re-supply the Dutch whaler “Willem Barendsz” off the coast of Antarctica. I also spent 4 Seasons in the Caribbean and my last trip was my second world cruise on the very first world cruiser, the sm “Statendam”. Canada was relatively uneventful, being flight crew for an international airline for 35 years.
            On my book shelves you will find names like Ian Plimer, Patrick Michaels, Richard Lindzen, Willie Soon, Robert Carter, John Abbot, Jennifer Marohasy, Nigel Lawson, Alan Moran, James Delingpole, Garth Paltridge, Joanne Nova, Kester Green, Scott Armstrong, Rupert Darwall, Ross McKitrick, Donna Laframboise, Mark Steyn, Christopher Essex, Bernard Lewin, Stewart Franks, Anthony Watts, Andrew Bolt and others. Being an expert on climate change, I am sure you recognize all of them…
            Now don’t forget to tell your shrink about your urge to insult people. Don’t leave out the part that you are a creep who uses an assumed name.

          • Matt in the Box

            Andrew Bolt is a racist cunt. Ian Plimer wrote a book called Telling Lies For God, now he tells lies for the benefit of resource companies and their shareholders.

            Listing a long line of contrarians means you listen to people lying. So what?

            And you still can’t tell objective truth from lies.

            You are no intellectual, and you are indistinguishable from an annoying pimply teenager who hasn’t passed a science subject, who thinks they knows shit, but knows nothing.

            Look at the data, and the graphs. Not only is it real. It is measurable. You are intellectually bankrupt. How the hell does you quoting the name of a right wing journalist, and a convicted transgessor of the racial discrimination act at that, disprove the peer reviewed science and the measured data? That, old man, is totally demented.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            It’s OK. You can calm down now. We all knew a while ago how clueless you are…
            Now, take your medication and don’t forget the appointment with your shrink, moron.

          • Matt in the Box

            Ziggy. Climate change denial is only a thing because your side of politics is populated by fundamentally dishonest, intellectually and morally bankrupt cowards. Whilst real scientists go on and discuss real things and map the climate over smaller and smaller historic timescales, and discuss proxy data techniques, and model the systems with ever and ever increasing accuracy you, and your ilk of lying bastard cowards disappear up your own asses in a bubble of untruth of your own devising. What climate change denial shows is that you are wrong. Wrong about everything. Do the world a favor and shut the fuck up. You contribute nothing.

            Got it? Your opinions are wrong. Your opinions are worthless. You are worthless.

          • Matt in the Box

            Please stop typing Ziggy. You have nothing good to say,

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            On the contrary, Einstein. I do have good things to say. But I can’t help it that you don’t get it.
            Basically I am on the side of those who like to see Canada prosper. Falling for the hoax would dismantle Canada and my grandchildren’s future. There is absolutely no proof that CO2 is the great villain or a higher temperature is disastrous! Not even the scientists, paid for by your politicians, would dare say that. Except, of course, the great Algore or Saint Suzuki!
            What have YOU said to convince a single one of the tens of thousands of scientists to change THEIR mind? You have referred to “green” propaganda and seem to believe it is science. You use foul language. That must have worked for you in the past and it seems to frustrate you that now you cannot even take down one old man with it… Have you not understood by now, that I have absolutely nothing to say to you? I could not care less what bottom feeders like you think. Everybody here know that people who use a pseudonym and trash-talk are nothing but scum!
            But, because you, obviously, do not get it, let me spell it out. I am writing to show others that one should never give in to foulmouthed trash, like you. You may be too stupid to realize there is no logic in what you write, it’s all there for others to see. I have used you in more than one way!
            At the same time I am open to reason. I will listen to anyone who can explain why Mother Nature took a 19 year nap during a time while we released the largest amount of anthropogenic CO2. Remember? Even the great Hansen believes that we should go back to the drawing board if the hiatus should ever last as long as 10 years!…

          • Matt in the Box

            Those scientists are fictitious, you dumb shit.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Your “source of information” appears to cater to the “boutique” inmates in your camp. I have no idea why you believe it could deal with my 19 year “nap”. Although it does not show a date, reader comments are, however, from 2008. It probably went over your head, however, some embedded graphs show flat measurements for the 11 of the 19 years covered, and some graphs started with the year 2000, instead of 1998. A minor inconvenience which you and the narrators seem to prefer to overlook. Instead of just pulling up this “proof” to silence people like myself, you should have gone through it yourself. It mentions sources such as “the met” (East Anglia) which was involved in scandals (fixing datas) and many commenters question the material presented, so I won’t have to repeat them here.
            Yes Matt-in-the-Box, you find me contemptible because I call your bluffs. Your imaginations do not line up with the facts. And you continue to display mannerism that does not increase your credibility.
            And here is one more little tidbit. The IPCC’s mandate only involves anthropogenic causes. Let me see, that is like sending a wrestler into the ring with both legs and one upper arm tied up. Because 65% of all weather/climate contributors have natural sources.
            However, your first concern should really be to keep your appointment. Foul language never did replace knowledge. Mention to her that I said that.

          • Matt in the Box

            Real world versus fantasy. You live in the latter.

            Remember everything you mention has been thoroughly debunked already. If you’re still banging a University East Anglia climategate drum you have been proven wrong years ago. In the light of evidence you have to change your views.

            You are standing in front of a red tomato, saying it’s blue, when the whole world is saying it is red, measured the color to the nanometer which shows it is red and you are still saying it is blue. You are wrong.

            So if I am using seemingly rude words, it is because you are a denier.

            You are wrong. 100% wrong. You have little understanding of the world. You have the arrogance to think it is not so. You are a blind man.

            Your politics sucks.
            Your level of science knowledge is infantile.
            Your arrogance is overwhelming.
            It is very sad that on this planet someone as intellectually pathetic as you exists.

            Fool.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Why do you insist on proving your ignorance?
            On this page you have used rude language to other people, not because I am a denier who believes the climate is changing.
            Now, see that shrink! It’s later than you think!

          • Matt in the Box

            You’re an ignorant and persistent dickhead.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            You have proven that your opinion has no value.
            Now, pick up that phone. Up your appointment. Don’t contact your mother until you are notably better. Don’t add to her grief!

          • Matt in the Box

            You’re right my opinions don’t matter.

            Facts do.

            Objective truth is king. Like the measured data that shows the world is warming fast.

            That’s why you’re a gimboid prick.

            Aren’t you dead already, old man?

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Yes, Einstein, the climate changes. Sometimes it gets warmer and then it cools again. Did I not mention that? Why did you not get it?
            Now, to your mental health. Take care of it now. Not fast. “Fast” is no concept to you! Today!
            And, thank you for your concern about me. No, I am not dead yet. But I may discard you. Not only are you addicted to foul language, you lack imagination (and obvious knowledge). Truth appears to baffle you. Any time I offer you truth it upsets you and you are back into the foul language…
            Pick up that phone.

          • Matt in the Box

            And then the world industrializes and reaches emission levels of 36.1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide last year and the extra heat it traps is stored largely in the ocean.

            Facts and reality, you dottering old fool.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Any idea how boring you are? Now you are repeating something I said earlier… Except you leave out that the results of all these emissions are zero, the temperature remains the same (even some of your “evidence” showed it, as I pointed out) and the sea level rise remains steady at 3mm pr. year. Which proves that whatever makes the climate change: it ain’t CO2! Facts and reality.
            If you were interested in facts and reality, you would get to that appointment… Your obsessions have not changed since you started writing here. Just thinking about your religion of climate change makes you go crazy. Only you can stop it. Now get going…

          • Matt in the Box

            “these emissions are zero”

            Bullshit.

            You are a dumb shit.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Yup. You did it! Too boring…
            Adios, amigo malo.

          • Matt in the Box

            Riddance ignoramus.

          • Johnpd

            We are now above 400ppm CO2 in the atmosphere, where extra CO2 now has a logarithmically decreasing impact as a greenhouse gas.
            http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/05/14/co2-nears-400-ppm-relax-its-not-global-warming-end-times-but-only-a-big-yawn-climate-depot-special-report/
            Renowned climatologist: “You can go outside & spit & have the same effect as doubling Carbon Dioxide.”

          • Matt in the Box

            Bullshit.

            Go and build a glasshouse in the Arizona Desert and sit in it for the whole of July.

          • Johnpd

            The Earth isn’t surrounded by glass, sh1te-for-brains. Growers pump in CO2 to greenhouses for extra plant growth, which is all it does, above 400ppm.

          • Matt in the Box

            Take a physics lesson shit for brains.

          • Johnpd
          • Matt in the Box

            Read a science book. Read what happens to plants as CO2 goes up and continues to go up. Those stomata get bigger and yields go up, and then CO2 goes higher and then plants stop reacting positively.

            What a sad fucking day. The morons have taken over the asylum.

            And read skeptical science. For each of your calls to read a bullshit blog, a million fold for fucks sake read something scientific.

          • Johnpd

            Something scientific for you Troll Moron, a peer reviewed paper:
            http://www.wattsupwiththat.com/?s=Trolls
            Trolls are Narcissists, Psychopaths & Sadists.
            Looked in the mirror lately?
            Get back in your box, under the bridge, Troll.

          • Matt in the Box

            A troll? don’t be stupid. This is a shit article of bare faced lies that has attracted dumb as fuck flies who don’t understand reality. Pointing this out makes you morons apoplectic. You are all mental midgets. The evidence is unequivocal that the world is warming. You fuckwits deserve to be marginalised. You are worthless intellectual midgets. Your brains don’t work very well.

          • Johnpd

            You ask for science bum-brain, & I give you a peer-reviewed article. You reply with nowt but insults. Where’s your science shitbrain? Chew on this moron:
            http://www.wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/04/the-robust-pause-resists-a-robust-el-nio-still-no-global-warming-at-all-for-18-years-9-months/

            You’re peddling lies, more lies, nothing but lies, boxbrain.

          • Matt in the Box
          • Johnpd

            Morning boxhead. I read no further than the first sentence because there is no warming trend. RSS & UAH satellite temperature datasets & millions of radiosonde balloon datasets show no warming for past 19 years, thicko. Your govt is corrupt & greedy & wants taxes on your electricity, numbskull, & you’re too dumb to figure that out, CNUT.
            http://www.drtimball.com/2015/co2-is-the-demon-because-malthus-and-ehrlich-were-wrong-about-overpopulation/

          • Matt in the Box

            No you read no further, because you’re scared to. You know you are lying to yourself, so you can’t even trust yourself to read anything that isn’t pre-approved for morons.

            Read this (if you’re not too much of a pussy):

            http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-game-over-global-warming-climate-sensitivity-seven-degrees-a7407881.html

          • Johnpd

            The unlimited stupidity of the box-brain.
            1) in the 1880s earth was coming out of The Little Ice Age.
            The little warming we’ve had has been a good thing, wanker.
            2) Michael Mann can now legally & openly be called a fraud since he failed to present evidence in his court case against the good climatologist, drtimball.com
            Mann tried to wipe from history the Medieval Warm Period, warmer than now, pre-industrial & prosperous. His infamous Hockey Stick Graph, a world laughing stock, was at first promoted by the fraudulent UN IPCC.
            Mark Steyn’s book A Disgrace to the Profession deals with this fraud, you sh1te-for-brains.
            http://www.c3headlines.com
            Plenty of graphs & articles showing the warming/climate fraud.
            Click on Quotes to find the agenda of the madmen/1%s pushing this con.
            Keep posting sh1te, shithead, I’ll keep sweeping it away.

          • Matt in the Box

            Fuck off you lying cunt.

          • Johnpd

            I know a bloke just like you: all temper, no brains, pathetic, you moron.

          • Matt in the Box

            You’ve won, by being the most boring and relentless prick in history.

            Oh and the world is getting warmer.

            But you can really just fuck off.

            Yournewswire.com is a pile of shit for shithead readers who know exactly nothing and have shit for brains.

            Sincerely you can fuck right off.

          • Johnpd

            & deprive myself of the fun of jerking your chain, fuckwit?
            No way, Jose. 🙂
            Your insults, lies & hysteria have been shown clearly as insufficient to hold up the warming/climate scam.
            It’s a hoax, it’s a scam, it’s a huge lie & anyone with even half a brain knows it.
            Yes, this means you, bollix for brains. 🙂
            http://www.drtimball.com/2011/ipcc-and-supporters-on-treadmill-of-false-explanations/
            Enjoy, boxhead.

          • Matt in the Box

            Liar, liar, lair. Eveything you wrote has been thoroughly debunked over and over and that makes you a lying cunt.

            Yournewswire are lying cunts.

            Come the revolution …

            We’ll start with your new liar in chief, and we won’t stop til those of you lying cuntservatives are all gone.

            Scientific rationalism will drive policy, not the interest of oil and coal companies and their pathetic piece of shit ideological fellow travelers.

          • Johnpd

            HEHEHEHEHE, the curtain is pulled aside & the boxhead shows himself a raving Communist Revolutionary Cunt.
            FYI, bricks for brains, the oil co’s are all owned by the Banksters, who have been financing both sides of every war, conflict & revolution since the French Revolution. Wars make debts = profits & power for banksters, moron.
            http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-federal-reserve-cartel-the-eight-families/25080

          • Johnpd

            Two books I reco’ for you, Troll:
            1) Pawns in the Game, 1955, by William Guy Carr.
            The bankster/moneylender plan for world domination was cooked up 1773, by Rothschild & pals, after they got the Dutch army captain William Stadtholder on the English throne & gat the Bank of England chartered, 1694.

            2) The Creature from Jekyll Island, by G. Edward Griffin.
            How the Central Banksters captured US, establishing the Fed, 1913.

            Also: youtube: all wars are bankers wars

            Enjoy, sh1te for brains.

          • Matt in the Box

            An anti-semite as well. That makes you a clusterfuck of a hate and stupid.

          • Johnpd

            & you’re a cnut.

          • 999Greg

            The repeated F-bomb (& other similar stuff) usage and name-calling has really modified the respect level.

          • Matt in the Box

            Foul mouthed contempt for the brain dead ideological warriors is entirely appropriate.

          • 999Greg

            If you really believe that, then you have fallen into the feeding-the-trolls trap —- and have become one yourself. sad

          • Matt in the Box

            Diddums.

          • Matt in the Box

            For dumb shits who are struggling to understand, here’s some satellite data. The Remote Sensing Systems Lower Troposphere (TLT) analysis shows a 1.35 +- 0.08K/century rise.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8238fc87f58729bbb7b2f1db375476e5f033de14651ac222053e7eed9f2da4f5.jpg

          • Johnpd

            Go to http://www.wattsupwiththat.com
            put: no warming 18 years 8 months in search box
            Lord Monckton’s essay.

          • Matt in the Box

            Lord Monckton is a fraud.

            Lord Monckton is a lying cunt.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Just a reminder: the article’s headline proclaims “Tens of Thousands of Scientists declare Climate Change a Hoax”
            That’s too difficult for you to understand? Better check with your shrink if there is a cancellation. See him sooner. Double up on your medication till you get there… Lay off the KoolAid!

          • Matt in the Box

            The article is shit.

          • anthony divjak

            Ziggy I might have done You wrong!
            youre against the hoax…..appologies!

          • Johnpd

            You have to be the thickest, rudest & most aggressive wing nut I’ve come across in a dog’s age. You veer between science & politics & make no sense of either.
            Get back in your box & bolt down the lid.

          • Judy Martin

            well well well..mr personality here has got his panties ina twist..wait till he finds out trump won and is the next potus…..poor child. oh, by the way. what is your degree in? hmmm… you talk a good line there boy…but you arent foolin anybody..you still live in your parents basement dont ya

          • Matt in the Box

            That’s 3 degrees numnut.

            And look some graphs:

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/17/the-north-pole-is-an-insane-36-degrees-warmer-than-normal-as-winter-descends/?utm_term=.c9beae2c5232

            http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/

            THe new POTUS is a piece of shit, and Americans have fucked up badly. It’s like the end of Thelma and Louise and they just pressed down on the accelerator.

            You’re a nation in steep decline, and it shows in the low levels of education.

          • Johnpd

            Ian Plimer’s excellent book is Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science
            You’re a liar as well as an idiot.

          • Matt in the Box

            Ian Plimer is just a liar.

          • Johnpd

            Great list. 🙂 May I recommend drtimball.com & his books?

          • anthony divjak

            So where did your brain get so damaged that you bought into man made global warming? Oh I know, it was the first ctrails over the ship you were on eh?

          • http://www.womanology.co.uk/ Andy Bodle

            “And, of course, there are the more than 31,000 American scientists (to date) who have signed a petition challenging the climate change narrative” …

            Funny how that claim does not link to anything, or cite any source or credible authority.

            Except it’s not funny, because the dangerous fascist moron who wrote this just PULLED IT OUT OF HIS ASS to manipulate poor, gullible fools like you.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Do you have evidence that the 31,000 scientists did not sign what they signed? Send it to the author of the article.
            Please note my opinion about foul-mouthed people. It does not increase your credibility.

          • Johnpd

            31,487 scientists, inc 9,029 with PhDs petition US Govt to reject Kyoto.
            http://www.petitionproject.org

          • Johnpd

            Read Michael Crichton’s novel, State of Fear.
            It’s a great place to start understanding the warming/climate scam.
            Even an aggressive moron should be able to absorb it.

          • Johnpd

            Excellent article & video. The only way to progress is free speech & scientific truth. Patrick Moore is a top man.

          • Johnpd

            Funny how the dumber people are, the more aggressive & insulting they are.

          • Matt in the Box

            John you are the digital equivalent of stepping in dog shit.

            I feel dirty.

          • Johnpd

            A mate of mine says skeptical….posts ONLY lies. I’ve never bothered even looking at the sh1te.

          • Matt in the Box

            Liar. You don’t have any friends.

          • Jiriki13

            I just realized that Matt in the Box is using a picture of his uncle… Me thinks he has aspirations of reaching that level of intelligence. It’s been interesting read through the comments here. As someone alluded to up in there somewhere, you can’t force people to believe the truth against their will. If people want to believe this climate change crap, they will. I remember when Al Gore first started spouting this garbage, they called it global warming. Then, when it became evident (note, MitB, this means as a result of the evidence), that global warming was a hoax, the idiots with the most to gain/lose from the fraud started calling it climate change instead. Which is something we’ve known happens for years, just didn’t have as much data about it. But the one good thing about Mr. Gore’s lies is that a lot of scientists started to look into it. So now we have a lot more about it, and the results show what many of us already knew. Climates change. The vikings raised cows on Greenland when the weather was much warmer than it is now. That’s a fact. Although Monkey in the Box seems to think that’s irrelevant. Fact is, climate in Siberia was tropic at one point, as evidenced by the fact that Woolly Mammoths have been discovered frozen in glaciers with tropical foilage in their stomachs. Note that this also indicates a sudden and drastic freeze, probably as the result of volcanic activity initiating an ice-age. Fact is that climates change, and have for thousands of years. And man has never caused those changes, and still is not.
            Now…does that mean we should ignore pollutants and our effect on our environment and indiscriminately destroy it? Of course not! As humans we should constantly be looking for ways to improve our world for the betterment not only of ourselves, but also our children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren. But to see people so bloated by the KoolAid is disturbing, quite frankly. I’m afraid they’ve had too much flouride in their water or toothpaste!
            There are far too many idiot in world already who are content to let others do their thinking for them:
            – Obama counted on the ignorance and apathy of the populace, and look where it got us! Double the deficite, an unaffordable healthcare system, a populace who is more divided and racist and hateful than ever, and a government that the country knows without a doubt is more corrupt and untrustworthy at every level than at any time in the history of this country!
            – Clinton counted on it, too. But thankfully most Americans woke up and it didn’t work for her!
            – Jury’s still out on Trump. But hopefully he doesn’t follow the same path as the last few presidents. It’s time we had someone who we can count on. But with idiots like Monkey in the Box spouting their rage and idiocy, my hope is dwindling. They aren’t able to think for themselves… So maybe we’re stuck with a society where the government has to do the thinking for them. Seems there have been a few movies made about that type of society. Shudder!

          • Matt in the Box

            Another clusterfuck of stupid. There must be a lot of cousin lovin’ goin’ on in the USA.

            Everyone of your assertions about climate have already been debunked, and I refer another scientifically illiterate to skepticalscience.com.

            Well maybe not all. They probably don’t even bother with the bat shit craziest of them all. “Fact is, climate in Siberia was tropic at one point, as evidenced by the
            fact that Woolly Mammoths have been discovered frozen in glaciers with
            tropical foilage in their stomachs.”

            If that is a “fact” then arf, arf, you’re a clever pinniped.

            I just can’t believe how fucking stupid these last hold outs are, desperately trying to rationalize their false beliefs.It’s moronic, it’s pathetic. It’s you.

          • Matt in the Box
          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Same wonderful display of intelligence! Our politicians are not the problem. Those idiots who vote for them are.

            Here is more proof:

            http://www.conservativefreepress.com/politics/worthlessness-paris-climate-agreement/

          • Matt in the Box

            The problem is shit publications like that, and the politicians who pander to ignorant morons whilst taking cash from oil companies.

            They’re not called cuntservatives for nothing.

            And the world warms … https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9701f5c6b5f8df4c581ac0d342c0e2ba5634a8056fae48d3909a722a19b3b40a.jpg
            http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/11/e1501923.full

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            John, I hope you won’t let this person get to you. He does not seem to possess any knowledge and runs to google for what in his warped mind is a suitable reply. This person is either mentally disturbed or he gets paid for trying to make people such as yourself drop out of this conversation. Heaven (and Vivian Krause) know that there is a lot of money kicking about to make the latter a distinct possibility…
            Thank you for recommending the work of Tim Ball!

          • anthony divjak

            would that be kitchen warming hoax?

    • Cool_Senpai

      You are a fucking idiot. Saying vote blue alone is very much proof of that.
      You can keep your corrupt piece of shit Hillary.

      • Matt in the Box

        Such hostility.

        But it does little to allay my fears that right wingers are all as dumb as fuck.

        • Cool_Senpai

          Sorry I am not a right winger. And there has been plenty of evidence over the years to prove she is corrupt. You are just a moronic liberal sheep, that goes along with it.

    • Jiriki13

      Wow! Someone drank the kool-aid down to the last drop!

      And they have the audacity to state that “Manipulating stupid people by lying to them to push an ideological barrow is evil.”! ha ha Apparently they haven’t been paying attention to the crap coming out of the Democrat’s mouths over the past several years…

      Anyone stupid enough to buy the rhetoric of either political party without using their brains to check their facts is a complete idiot! You think the Democrats are going to save you? Or the Republicans? Sorry, but nobody can save an fool against their will.

  • Anne

    If it’s so real why aren’t those celebrities who are speaking out about it….getting more publicity and attention mind you, why aren’t they giving up their private planes, boats and yachts, and houses bigger than a city??? Hypocrates!

    • Ena Kana

      climate change is science, and we all know that those who question science are in the REALLY DUMB CROWD

      • Johnpd

        Climate is always changing, for 4.5 billion years, as Buzz Aldrin said. Anyone who has done their reading knows that man-made CO2 has had no measurable effect on either warming (there’s been none for ~ 19 years) or climate.
        Anyone who has sucked up the propaganda is in the REALLY DUMB CROWD.

        • Grizzly Adams

          bwahahaha…19 years…bwahahaha…what a crock…it’s bad science to use a year where an intermittent whether anomally occurred as the foundation of the position.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            In that case, what do you wish to deny about Kenneth Richard’s claim that the CO2/temperature correlation only matches 15% of the time during the past 165 years, namely between 1977 and 2001?

          • Grizzly Adams

            Why would I try to deny a single cherry picked statistic that in and of itself is meaningless to the climate argument

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Sorry. I did not realise that Richard’s claim needed explanation… If the CO2 emissions and the rise of global temperature only match 15% of the time over the last 165 years, would it not indicate that something else instead of CO2 causes the temperature to rise? If you do not like 1988 as a starting point, how do you feel about the Summer of 1248? Will you accept that statistic to prove global cooling?

          • Grizzly Adams

            It didn’t need explanation..neither does your latest. My response is unchanged.

          • Steve Vise

            Yup. Can’t shake your faith in the Church of Anthropogenic Climate Change. Praise St. Algore !

          • Grizzly Adams

            Faith…I have none…when someone floats an argument that has yet to be debunked I’ll have a look…to date however, nothing but the old tired arguments.

        • Ena Kana

          You take the simple view, but nature is not simple. Climate has OF COURSE been changing since Earth’s atmosphere first began accumulating; this is not about whether or not the climate IS changing, its about the RATE OF CHANGE. Now, if you had been using reputable sources in your readings you would have known that, and would know without a doubt that anthropogenic climate change is a fact of reality.

          • Cool_Senpai

            It is funny that *reputable sources* means, only scientist that you believe
            and speak on global warming as a fact.

          • Rae

            Um, no. Reputable sources include not just peer reviewed journals which some have open access to (from experts who know the complexity of earth science, or what we know as of today), government researchers and all that. http://writingcenter.appstate.edu/sites/writingcenter.appstate.edu/files/Credible%20v%20Non-Credible%20Sources13.pdf You have access too. You just choice ignorance instead. And humanity suffers for your stupidity. Well done.

          • Cool_Senpai

            First of all you dumb piece of shit, I already know what that is. But see, sheep like you only follow everything the government claims. But you ignore everything else other researchers claim. So honestly humanity suffers from your stupidity, you dumb cunt.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            Yeah, the ignorant came out and voted in record numbers. After 8 years of watching Honey Boo Boo and the Apprentice, they were well prepared, armed with all the facts…..
            HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

          • Seeker of Truth

            Seems the number of “ignorant” ones must have skyrocketed since Obama took office. Thank his “educational policies” for that. And by voting more of the same you are voting for more ignorance. This leads me to believe that the ignorant ones are NOT the deplorable’s actions or the people they serve, its YOU and the people YOU serve.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Anthropogenic CO2 releases are sky high. 25% Of the total has gone up during this very century. Yet, as was mentioned above, the temperature has remained flat for the last 25 years… I’d love to see your answer since you seem to know something about the RATE OF CHANGE…

          • John Delaney

            Less than 2% of polution is man made ! Forest fires alone dump 10 times the carbon into the atmosphere than man. PS.. The human body is composed of carbon ergo not all bad (unless you are retarded liberal … then of course your noxious fumes are deadly .

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            With all due respect, John, just because some people now talk about carbon “pollution”, they then turn around and tax CO2, a clear gas with very little evidence that it is a driver of global warming.

          • zzz05

            What does “clear” have to do with it?
            What’s clear is the evidence that it is the primary driver of global warming.
            1) CO2 absorbs IR radiation at the wavelengths the earth emits. We can now see that in the spectrum chart of the Earth taken from space. https://scienceofdoom.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/olr-toa-goody-1989.png
            2) Conservation of energy demands that that end up raising the atmospheric temp.
            3) The average temperature of the Earth is 60 degrees F warmer than that of the moon, despite absorbing less than 80% as much of the sun’s energy as the moon does. This is as close to the “controlled experiment” self-proclaimed skeptics demand as they are going to get; the same sunlight at the same distance; the difference is the earth has an atmosphere. Given points 1 and 2 above, and no other known mechanism, scientific integrity requires us to postulate cause and effect.
            4) Svante Arrhenius worked all this out for the stratosphere in 1896 and E. O. Hulburt worked out the convection of the heat from the troposphere to the stratosphere in 1931, demonstrating that the limiting factor is, indeed, Arrhenius’ mechanism, the calculations for which remain valid 120 years later without correction.
            5) Given the above, why would anybody NOT expect raising the CO2 level further to raise the temperature further? There are no known mechanisms that would limit it. Note that in the graph above that CO2 absorption is NOT maxed out, there is still energy radiating outwards that more CO2 will absorb, making that notch deeper and putting that energy back into the atmosphere, despite some “skeptics” claim that it is already saturated.
            6) Yes we know hat the effect depends on the logarithm of the CO2 concentration, not directly, meaning that the amount of change slows down as you start to near the point of saturation. Everybody knows that; it is intuitively obvious and appears that way in Arrhenius’ calculations, despite some “skeptics” claim that this is a new thing they have just figured out which changes everything.
            7) We are digging up and burning massive amounts of carbon from underground, as coal, petroleum, and natural gas.
            8) This generates massive amounts of CO2.
            9) Although the Earth has been disposing of some of this extra CO2, measurements of the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere show it is rising consistent with about half of it remaining in the atmosphere.
            10) The formerly stable isotopic composition of the CO2 in the atmosphere is changing as would be expected by the addition of carbon which has been out of the carbon cycle for a hundred million years.
            11) The amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes etc, is small compared to what is generated from fossil fuels, despite what some “skeptics” claim. Also we can see the small loss of atmospheric O2 from making new CO2 (from the old fossil carbon), that wouldn’t happen if it was old underground CO2 coming out.
            12) Despite both sets of data being noisy, the rise in measured global average temp is largely correlated with the rise in atmospheric CO2, i.e. beginning around the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, and accelerating over the past 50 years.
            13) The above mechanism not just being sufficient for, but essentially requiring rising global average temperature from our fossil fuel use, any suggestion that there is some other cause which just happens to look just like fossil fuel use also requires some mechanism that prevents the fossil fuel use from having its effect. No viable candidate for either of these mechanisms has been suggested.
            14) The “skeptics” observation that the atmospheric water vapor has a greater total effect on IR absorbance than CO2 does ignores that changing temperature also affects the amount of atmospheric water vapor, making it a feedback mechanism rather than setting an absolute value.
            15) Given the above, the only uncertainty is how much effect is expected, including positive and negative feedback effects, mainly water vapor. Early theories that additional atmospheric water vapor would be a negative feedback proved wrong, and the estimated amount by which atmospheric water vapor enhances the CO2’s effect is getting more precise all the time.
            16) The argument by “skeptics” that “the models don’t predict correctly” is not how science works. The correct question is whether a model with a greenhouse gas component fits observations better than one without; and it’s absolutely true that no model without a greenhouse gas component predicts the rise over the past century or so at all.
            17) In fact, most of the inaccuracy in predictions by models with a greenhouse gas component appears to relate to the El Nino Southern Oscillation in the Pacific; in years when the models predict that correctly, they do well in predicting global average temp. That’s where the research focus is these days.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            I am delighted to see someone, you, has finally taken the time to actually reply to specific questions asked by “sceptics”. Not being a scientist myself I have followed certain sceptics, such as Tim Ball, Ian Clark and Patrick Moore. During the past 8 years, or so, I have, unsuccessfully I might say, asked people to rebut the evidence provided by these experts. I am particularly interested because Patrick Moore uses graphs in his presentations which clearly show that CO2 and global temperature do not correlate over the long run. During a shorter period of time, the last 165 years which are generally accepted as the “industrial age”, temperature and CO2 are only in sync 15% of the time, namely between 1977 and 2001. Compliments of Kenneth Richard
            You must, therefor, excuse my disinterest in the material provided by you. None of it even remotely touches on the points in question and leaves me to wonder how much out of touch you must be to not even know what primary questions are asked by sceptics, or, by “deniers”.
            Anyway, perhaps you will take the time to have a look at Patrick Moore’s video which is embedded towards the end of the following article and reply to something that is relevant…
            Hope you don’t mind that I go back to George Nori’s program. He has the author of “Not by fire but by ice”. It was just mentioned that the oceans were 17* warmer at the time the dinosaurs went extinct and CO2 levels were a lot higher, both during previous ice ages and tropical eras…
            I am just looking at your paragraph #17 again. Boy are you ever wrong! All predictions have been incorrect! The polar ice did not disappear in the year 2014. Additional CO2 in the atmosphere has created additional plant growth. We have had less storms. Less draughts. The IPCC certainly did not predict the current hiatus, which so far has lasted 19 years and nobody knows when or how it will end! Grrrrrrr.

          • anthony divjak

            An excellent point made, thank You!

          • Ziggy Eckardt
          • Colin Spencer

            Earth does not emit IR radiation, it reflects is. The primary component causing radiation retention is not carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It is water vapour. Clouds as well as the invisible moisture content of the air. Real scientists have grave doubts about the influence of carbon dioxide with regard to radiation retention because carbon dioxide is such a tiny proportion of the atmosphere – .03%, so I am led to believe. Sure, if it goes to .04% it would increase by one third, but it is still an infinitesimal component of the atmosphere. There are many who just can’t admit that fact, unfortunately.

          • zzz05

            “Earth does not emit IR radiation, it reflects it.”
            Not starting off well, by demonstrating a denial of a central truth of physics. “All matter with a temperature greater than absolute zero emits thermal radiation.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_radiation.
            “The primary component causing radiation retention is not carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It is water vapour.”
            Yeah, like I said:
            “14) The “skeptics” observation that the atmospheric water vapor has a greater total effect on IR absorbance than CO2 does ignores that changing temperature also affects the amount of atmospheric water vapor, making it a feedback mechanism rather than setting an absolute value.
            15) Given the above, the only uncertainty is how much effect is expected, including positive and negative feedback effects, mainly water vapor. Early theories that additional atmospheric water vapor would be a negative feedback proved wrong, and the estimated amount by which atmospheric water vapor enhances the CO2’s effect is getting more precise all the time.”
            “Real scientists have grave doubts about the influence of carbon dioxide with regard to radiation retention because carbon dioxide is such a tiny proportion of the atmosphere”
            No real scientists “have grave doubts about the influence of carbon dioxide with regard to radiation retention because carbon dioxide is such a tiny proportion of the atmosphere”. Not one. Zero. That would be a good test for “Not a real scientist.”
            Nitrogen accounts for 78% of the atmosphere, oxygen 21% and argon 0.9%. Here’s the emission spectrum of the planet, labelled with the atmospheric gasses which absorb at those frequencies. http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_05/curve_s.gif Do you see oxygen, nitrogen, or argon there anywhere? No, because they absorb 0% of that energy. Given that 78% of 0, 21% of 0, and .9% of 0 total to 0, the absorption of the remaining “infinitesimal” 0.1% begins to have some significance; i.e., it accounts for ALL of the absorbance. Why is that so hard to understand? Do you have an issue with the general legal definition of too impaired to drive at 0.08% alcohol, or is that too infinitesimal to make a difference?

          • Colin Spencer

            Wikiphysics doesn’t cut it. Emission is the result of reflection. Stored heat is not emitted from the earth. 1st law of thermodynamics includes the statement that “heat is attracted to a colder surface” therefore the colder surface that absorbs heat does not emit heat. Physics? You need to put a bit more effort into your theory than to consult Dr Google.

          • zzz05
          • anthony divjak

            Now thats someone that the Ctrails have greatly damaged alrady. You dont seem to take latest formula of lithium in last few months very well. Youre not alone!!!!!

          • Ena Kana

            WRONG—LOOK AT THE SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS.
            Do you even know how science works?? Look again —> C-O-N-S-E-N-S-U-S
            YOU COLIN SPENCER ARE TALKING ABOUT THE BACKGROUND RATE. THE BACKGROUND RATE OF CHANGE IS NOT THE PROBLEM——–>IT IS THE RATE OF CHANGE CAUSED BY HUMAN ACTIVITY THAT IS THE CONCERN.
            —–ANTHROPOGENIC ACCELERATION—–
            The background rate is what all creatures adapt to SLOWLY. Your focus on the background rate reveals that you don’t understand the subject at all. Why don’t you visit Amazon.com and order a science textbook and begin your study of the real world.

          • Corruption_Eruption

            The consensus is that 43% of climate scientist believe that CO2 from human activity is causing climate change. Not very compelling.

          • pezcleo

            Science is NOT done by CONSENSUS! SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS said the world was flat not that long ago.

          • Johnpd

            Read Ian Plimer’s book: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science. The idea that man-made CO2 is the primary climate driver is ludicrously stupid.

          • Ena Kana

            No it is you that are ludicrously stupid. CO2 is an INSULATING AGENT. HOW MF SIMPLE DOES IT HAVE TO BE SPELLED OUT FOR YOU

          • Paul Schofield

            Thank you, the sad thing is that by the time these flat earth people realise the truth they will be surrounded by a collapsing ecology and dying family members. I have given up trying talk to people about global warming, runaway climate change and the disgusting wars and killing machines we continually manufacture and make more effective. Humanity is a failed species and evolution will help us put an end to ourselves.

          • Ena Kana

            YOU ziggy echardt are “SOME PEOPLE”
            Climate researchers however are scientists who study reality. You are just a worker bee now go do something usefull….

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            No problem, Ena. Let’s leave it to scientists. (Let’s make sure there is freedom for science. “Scientists” with an agenda, especially those who predict the Artic is ice-free by 2014, should be shunned… Agreed?)

          • zzz05

            No offense, but this shows you don’t get the basics of the debate. Forest fires make no net contribution to climate change because that carbon they spew into the air was in the air relatively recently, until those trees pulled it out; and even if there were no fire it would end up back in the atmosphere before too long as the trees die and rot; and it gets pulled out again as new plants grow, etc. The famous carbon cycle. This has resulted in a metastable CO2 equilibrium for a few hundred million years.
            In contrast, before that point, huge quantities of CO2 were pulled out of the air by plants in the Carboniferous Era so quickly that when the plants died they were buried and fossilized before they could rot back into CO2, thereby lowering the atmospheric CO2, temperature, and humidity. This “new” climate is the one in which all land animals and all modern plants evolved to thrive, as well as humanity’s entire agricultural system, economy, society, habitat, etc.
            Now we are digging up that hundred million year old carbon and putting it back into the atmosphere ASAP. Do you see why that is different from forest fires? And what the most likely guess of how the climate will respond is hotter and wetter?

          • aspenllc

            Never read such libtard dribble in my life!
            And did you actually say evolved?? As in the completely bullshit theory of evolution?
            A child knows evolution is total bullshit!

          • Ena Kana

            Just because you ASPENLLC have an emotional reaction from hearing facts, does not mean that those facts are any less valid!
            Evolution was going on long before your stupid @$$ fell out of your momma’s vaginal orifice, and you crying about not being able to accept reality doesn’t make reality any less REAL.
            I know that four-letter word scares you, you prefer the IMAGINED. I’ve got a simple response for this kind of thinking:
            GROW TF UP

          • rochesternative

            are you brave enough to take on Evolution on this comment page too….because there are a lot of us out here that don’t believe that baloney either.

          • anthony divjak

            Right on sir!
            Humans hardly make a dent into the so called global warming, our trees are dying for lack of co2 not because of it!!!

          • pezcleo

            Many forest fires are started by lighting. Prior to man putting them out they burned until they ran out fuel or weather put them out.

          • zzz05

            as was mentioned above, your “the temperature has remained flat for the last 19 years.” factoid has been retired.
            Of course, as anybody with the intellectual curiosity and/or integrity to actually look at a graph knows, the “remained flat” was always BS, based on a definition of flat as “if you subtract the average temp of this year from the (up till then unusual, now routine) average temp in 1998 and ignore everything else, you get a fairly small slope”. Which is not how you calculate an average no matter how dumb you are unless you are deliberately trying to be dumb.
            https://goo.gl/images/xUF4vo
            https://goo.gl/images/blj02j
            etc.

          • deniersareboneheads

            The last 5 years have been the hottest in recorded history. They call the temperature trend a hockey stick because it spiked when we started burning huge amounts of fossil fuels (at first we didn’t use very much) and the trend is straight up. People who lie about this for money or for fear of change are seriously endangering the future of our kids. You guys should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves. The author of this article is clearly a Trump cheerleader (see his other articles). I’ll be interested to see his articles on the spike in racist activity – his name doesn’t look very waspish. But if he is being paid to confuse people, I guess money bought his soul.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your own facts… Source please. Where is the graph showing that the last 5 years were the hottest on record?

          • zzz05
          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Yup… That explains it. One and a half degrees up in 10 years? Wow!

          • anthony divjak

            Say what you will but mr Trump got the climate warming hoax RIGHT!
            And its about time, hope he will do something about the Ctrail dumps over the Canada too1

          • Steve Vise

            “A fact of reality”. Of course, that “reality” is only real for those who believe it. As there are many tens of thousands of scientists who reject this “reality”, and since you are not a scientist, then you must accept the conclusion of the scientists with which you agree. This is called “faith”, and “anthropogenic climate change” is your religion.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            HAHAHA – you cannot “UNBELIEVE” reality. There are tens of dozens maybe who deny – they are all on fossil fuel payrolls, or they have their heads way up their ass trying to read the bibles there.

          • aspenllc

            So now the Bible is causing the myth of “global warming”???
            Makes perfect sense to me.. Hahahahaha

          • PissedoffinAZ

            Actually, I was at my evangelical relative’s office one day when I heard another “well-informed” member of his church opined that he didn’t believe in global warming because “My God would not let that happen.” uh huh.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            So sorry that you are unable to grasp the difference between HISTORICAL climate change, and the accelerated process being amplified by carbon emissions. Of course, where you get your “info” makes a difference. There are FACTS, and there is the BULL you are BUYING.

          • anthony divjak

            the only $GLOBAL WARMING$ comes out of the rear end and its called the Fart!

          • Peter Nann

            I think you lost the crowd here at ‘rate of change’.

          • zzz05

            Forest fires have been occurring since long before there were people. Obviously this theory that people cause forest fires in dry forests with campfires and cigarettes and so on is just a hoax started by Smokey the Bear so he can keep his cushy job, and cool Mountie hat.

          • Johnpd

            Prove it, dumbo: how much warming has man caused?
            The total warming of the entire 20th century was about .8 Deg C, harmful to no one.

          • Ena Kana

            HARMFUL TO NO ONE
            It is you that makes claims, claims that you cannot substantiate except by your own worthless signature.

          • anthony divjak

            Yup, thats about it! Ctrails needed to be justified so the myth was invented for *just in case the SHTF* And it is not cheap to run the program, in comes the *carbon tax idea* to pay for it all……..

          • Johnpd

            Anthropogenic climate change, which used to to be called global warming before the warming stopped ~ 19 years ago, is a completely unscientific scam, hugely promoted in the lying MainSlimeStream Media which gave us Hillary 86% chance of winning. You cite no reliable sources so I recommend Prof. Ian Plimer’s book: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science.
            Simple question, moron, how has the rate of change, changed? You’re full of ‘it.

          • Ena Kana

            Your ego is a scam—you parlor non-facts to other Homo sapiens to establish yourself as a complete idiot in a fake-lab coat you bought online. Why don’t you stop typing and start reading DF

          • Mrmossyone

            Using the word homo sapien time and time again does NOT make you appear more intelligent. Just the opposite actually. Princess Bride comes to mind.

          • anthony divjak

            Absolutely correct! Bravo!

        • Kurtis Kunesh

          If it’s not a hoax we’re all screwed. And does the whole planet rest on the egos of groups of scientists who can’t agree that humans are in denial about destroying the biosphere, it’s genetic mutation, warring against each other in the name of Allah the god of greed and then saying that nature is doing it all to us so we don’t have any responsibility because that’s not good for business. Is that really what humans worship the business of Gaia domination as an Empire. I am divesting as best I am able from the needy greedy rat race. Namaste

        • timallard

          Johnpd states the denialista turd they drop all the time capturing data with an El Niño at the start to skew the results instead of like 30-years, the more the better the reliability, eh?

          It still stinks @disqus_g7kESc1tR4:disqus, we jumped CO2 100-ppm in a century nature can’t do that so we get your agenda-driven-drivel and don’t expect tomorrow to be like the geologic past because we left it, we be in the Anthropocene for a list of reasons some monumental.

          Setting a new record of 3.05-ppm in 2015 it was 10-Petagrams Carbon, 10-PgC about 37-Gigatons frozen it’s 37-km³ of CO2eqv or 3.7-Gt per 1-ppm CO2.

          That’s 370-Gt CO2 added to legacy with 1/4 remaining over 10,000-years, bad odds on 2C like it’s a joke right now expect 4C/7.2F in 84-years and counting down, aka “by 2100”.

          Buzz is on good drugs or alcohol or just ignore or insane, as in sociopaths knowing the reality and caught in the money-money trap, got their hands on the cash and can’t let go to save themselves or anyone else.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            I can’t think of anyone arguing against your data presented. The question remains, if CO2 causes global warming, why didn’t it for the last 19 years?

          • timallard

            Easy one @Ziggy Eckardt it’s called El Niño, 1998 was a big one so if you start statistics from just before that year the results are skewed: find where the heating “slowed down” on this graph: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0dXjmoA0dw

            What kind of planetary statistics do you expect when the start was 19-years ago, CO2 was ~365-ppm so how do you expect the planet to be in a “hiatus” when that’s 60-ppm above the maximum for the past 1,000,000-year and we passed that in 1916, 720-Gigatons worth of carbon??

            Are you that stupid to think it’ll go away by some miracle of Team OIigarch’s thermodynamics expertise, they lie all the time about it?

            The excess heat is in the oceans that are gathering 93% of it and atmospheric temperatures only reflect the air moving heat and moisture north and cold air south like an old fashioned ice-box and when the ice melts the food spoils.

            How the fk can it rain in December in Anchorage, Alaska? You go ahead an explain that historic evet for us thanks.

            Also, the pteropod populations, a favorite baby salmon food are losing population size from ocean acidification, all Alaskan waters will be below the aragonite saturation point within 60-years, it’s quite serious as it only gets worse.

            There is no “carbon budget” left that slogan equal to “manifest destiny”, the oceans are acidifying 10-times faster than an extinction event from the rate-of-change being unnaturally beyond natural systems dealing with it or it wouldn’t be that way, eh?

            Watch this, DARE TO SAY YES, eh?

            “The rate of acidification is 10-times faster or more than anything we have seen for the past 50-million years and perhaps over the last 300-million years.”.

            ICES ASC 2013 Plenary Lecture by Dr Richard Feely, 9:10 into 1:01:08; 14:30 in CO2 vertical maps showing where the excess is; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etFob9Wy45E

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Starting with your logic, that 1998 is a bad year to pick, I am sure you have no problem with my earlier suggestion that we should start measuring at the time when the Vikings were farming Greenland. It would then prove global cooling. If we go back to the middle of the Roman Warm Period it would prove that there is even more global cooling?… Statistics can be fun. One of my better jokes involves a statistic.
            Is it not interesting that when we start measuring the increasing temperature in 1977, the reason given is increasing CO2 emissions. When we look at the rise in global temperature in the 30s and 40s and there is no increase of the anthropogenic CO2 emissions, we ignore it. When we pick the year 1998 as a start whilst CO2 emissions are through the roof but the temperature remains static, our scientists who also gave us an ice free Arctic, the drying up rivers out of the Himalayas and disappearing polar bears, they pretend the hiatus does not exist. What’s the use of discussing any of this if you prefer to ignore facts? Did you know that the current hiatus was coming in 1998? Do you, or even one of your scientist friends, know when or how it will end?
            Like a Chinese torture we are told, drip-drip-drip, that warm water in the rivers makes our salmon disappear. Then we get a bumper crop of Coho, 2 Million of them appearing un-expected, and all we hear is an excited stream keeper at the Brunet River, reported in the little local paper… Nothing to see here, folks! Not even a pending disaster…

            It would be silly for me, definitely a non-scientist, to try and match wits with your Dr. Richard Feely. However, I must repeat my earlier question. If the so-called “deniers” are so wrong, why have I not heard anyone debunking Dr. Patrick Moore’s position on CO2 emissions? (That position, by the way, is shared by a lot of others!)
            Warmer water makes the oceans expand. Yet with all the extra heat stored in the world oceans it has kept the water level rise at an even 3mm per annum. Only totally ignorant people like Mayor Robertson of Vancouver believe that adds up to a meter by the end of the century. That’s why he wants to raise Vancouver’s dikes at a cost of $800.000.-. For those unfamiliar with the guy we affectionately call Mayor Moonbeam, he is the genius so concerned about GHG emissions that he converted many streets into bike lanes. Now traffic is so congested that it takes twice as long to get anywhere and I have no idea how much the emissions have increased.
            Even though Saint Suzuki was one of the “scientists” who 40 years ago cautioned that a new ice age was coming, the mainstream global warmers have shed those predictions and changed to global warming, then had to change to climate change and now talk ocean acidification, we have seen scientist “deniers” who have successfully proven any of this to either be wrong, of little consequence or to be a result of natural causes.
            One more thought. If a warming planet is of such concern and we know for sure that it is caused by CO2 emissions, why then do we have our American and European “friends” pounce on poor ol’ Fort Mac? All of Canada, the second largest country in the world, is responsible for less than 2% of global emissions. China’s increases alone would wipe out all gains made in less than a month, if we were stupid enough to shut down all of Canada! (Whilst successfully blocking a pipeline to keep our oil landlocked, “friend” Obama is responsible for the largest increase in US oil and gas explorations. He also made a deal with China. Whilst Canada must keep it’s oil in the ground, China is welcome to increase emissions till the year 2030. Stay tuned. There is another conference coming in Marocco!)

          • timallard

            @disqus_8e3O1FV1Wq:disqus states, ” I am sure you have no problem with my earlier suggestion that we should start measuring at the time when the Vikings were farming Greenland.”; and he’s totally wrong about that.

            Examining that CO2 chart I posted, I took a screenshot of where we passed the maximum CO2 for the 800,000-year ice-core records, all of them as an ensemble for global locations it was 305±5-ppm, the Vikings died off, it wasn’t a truly global warming and doesn’t show up in Tibetan glacial cores:

            Localized ice-cores vs global average temperature; “What the Ice Cores Tell Us”; at 3:10; Ellen Mosly-Thompson, AGU, Dec 2010; 8:19; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G80mIbF5yEg
            http://www.mallard-design.com/mdc2010/media/co2-max-305-lines.jpg

            We went above the max about 1916, 100-years ago, we’re close enough to 405-ppm to call it 100-ppm gained; http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/history.html

            That rate-of-change is the problem nature never did that and can’t do it, sea-life takes too long to follow.

            Instead you must relate your thesis to the mid-Holocene warming, a geologic term for circa 8k-4k years-before-present that American archeologists called the Altithermal and it was about the time the Sahara dried out from it’s 20,000-year cycle tied to Milankovich forcings around 5k-ybp.

            That warmed the northern hemisphere about 1C/1.8F and turned most of western USA into arid steppe with a strip of desert from West Texas to Canada.

            CO2 varied from 255-270-ppm, only 15-ppm of CO2 managed to heat up the planet more than 100-ppm as the latter is too-much-too-fast for a response yet, it’s the time-frame of the effects from the speed and magnitude of the forcing on a bio-geochemical world.

            Phytoplankton are a major basis of the oceanic food-chain that’s not like on land, it’s upside down and the tiny things feed the whole chain.

            They with calcium-carbonate shelled trading CO2 imbalance in the atmosphere for loss in shells to greater than 7.9 oceanic pH average having enough aragonite to make them over thousands of years.

            So the thesis you propose is rather meaningless in the context of CO2 values and rate-of-change for reality it’s simply put with citations in this talk still takes an hour to cover the science.

            “The rate of acidification is 10-times faster or more than anything we have seen for the past 50-million years and perhaps over the last 300-million years.”.
            ICES ASC 2013 Plenary Lecture by Dr Richard Feely, 9:10 into 1:01:08; 14:30 in CO2 vertical maps; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etFob9Wy45E

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            I get it. Greenland was colder than it is right now and the Vikings were able to farm on ice… Of course they die off when an ice age moves in and steals your food supply!… Quiet frankly, I am getting tired of pointing people into the direction of those who have proven that CO2 does not drive the climate… Look it up yourself.

          • timallard

            @Ziggy Eckardt states even more agenda-driven-driven thusly, “Quiet frankly, I am getting tired of pointing people into the direction of those who have proven that CO2 does not drive the climate…”, we are not amused.

            Maybe take 50-minutes and get the story on those Vikings you keep bringing up; “The Lost Viings”; 52:46; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ea0iVLWTtg4

            They were devout church goers & seems priests didn’t allow them to mix with the “heathens” so they skipped out on the Inuit Luxury Kayak food service for dwindling revenue from ivory.

            And, they somehow missed that they overgrazed their herds, being the topsoils in Greenland are rather thin to begin with their herds began to dwindle from not enough hay in fall to feed them through the winter … sad tale indeed.

            They weren’t as smart as Tibetans and lived with their animals instead of a floor above them, rather stinky-cosy, eh?

            Yet Ziggy Eckardt thinks they were really cool because they landed like the settlers driven by “manifest destiny” to rob the Tribes of lands their territories as boundaries the Western Kill-n-Oppress all “heathens” in the arid west during a “good climate” spell, for the Vikings it was warmer for the settlers it was wetter than normal.

            Astronomical forcing drove the thing before the Anthropocene’s radical jump in CO2 acidifying the oceans 10-times faster than the PETM folks, that’s not trivial and is also heating the planet to ’bout 4C/7.2F in 84-years and counting down.

            Forget salmon their young’s basic food supply is dwindling from acidification reducing populations by increasing the energy a larva must put into a shell getting more and more, you can see the etching from the acidic water easily, it’s not a theory: “Jeremy Mathis, Impacts of Arctic Ocean Acidification – 31 March 2016”; 55:32; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1kq7I3X5SY

            So when nature averages 1-ppm/1,000-years the big jump at the end of the last ice-age 1-ppm/180-years and we hit the highest CO2 value ever reached for 1,500,000-years in 1916 and added 100-ppm since then.

            By what nature does as a “radical jump” 1-ppm/180-years times 100 = 180,000-years worth of CO2 if nature did it.

            However, agenda-driven-drivel demands to point the finger away from CO2 as a driver by burn-baby-burn, Team Oligarch’s famous Circus Act the Ringmaster in this case being Ziggy Eckardt stepping up the ante on risk with no way out of the lion cage …

          • Matt in the Box

            Oh Ziggy, you’re so dumb..

            Here you are debunked yet again by the good people at Skeptical Science.
            http://www.skepticalscience.com/greenland-used-to-be-green.htm

            And look at the pretty graphs on this fresh off the academic press article:
            http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record-heat-despite-a-cold-sun/#.WCm0ygoUOJc.facebook

            It seems the real science points to you being just an idiot Ziggy.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            As suggested by John Hunter, I will not respond to “Matt”

            However here is part of what he considers “proof”: (He obviously has no interest in informing himself and stops reading the minute he finds any kind of confirmation of his brainwashed status)

            Greenland was relatively warm between about 800-1300 AD due to the well-defined 1500 year solar cycle, as detailed by Singer and Avery in:

            “Unstoppable global warming every 1500 years”.

            We are currently in another upswing in the solar cycle, which started about 1750, and which will probably rise about another 0.5-1 degree C over the next few hundred years. Current T to the 21st century is entirely in line with this solar cyle trend. C02 is irrelevant to this cycle,it has been traced 600 times over the last 1 million years in ice cores, and is a result of an overlap between the 87 and 210 year solar cycles.

            It is well documented, world wide, and climatologists have conveniently forgotten about it (see reference given above).

            Greenland was settled by vikings during the last solar warming period, which is also why they travelled so far in general during this time period-the northern world was warm.

          • Matt in the Box

            Do you believe your own bullshit Ziggy?

            Insolation is only a small determinant of forcings. Read Skepticalscience.com about your Greenland bullshitting.

            You remain a demented fool with zero understanding.

            And the world is still warming.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            Here is another link (accidentally?) forwarded by “expert” Matt:

            http://green-agenda.com/greenland.html

          • Matt in the Box

            Give up fuckface.

            You can respond with low quality links that have been debunked and debunked, but you refuse to read papers that prove you wrong.

            Your cherry picking and inability to spot bullshit is tiresome and doesn’t change reality. You really do have a low level of understanding of the world. You’re not very bright, we get it, so please shut the fuck up.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            As mentioned earlier, I will no longer respond to “science” at this level.

          • Matt in the Box

            You’re incapable of talking science Ziggy.
            You only do propaganda gullibility.

          • Ziggy Eckardt
          • Matt in the Box

            Well that’s a bucket of shit.

          • Matt in the Box

            We shouldn’t stand by doing nothing while the least capable like Ziggy come to terms with science like this:

            http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/11/e1501923.full

            Fuckwits like Ziggy and Trump should be ignored. We need to decarbonize now.

          • timallard

            This video is a recent archeological examination by an international team on the disappearance of the Vikings from Greenland, to solve why they suddenly were gone when a visitor arrived, still with domestic livestock running wild.

            The dumbsquat Ziggy Piggy jumps on doubt and his pants burnt off nothing left to pull down on the Emperor of dung slinging … the Vikings were ruined by Religion and Politics:

            “The Lost Vikings”; 52:46; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ea0iVLWTtg4

            Carbon-dioxide in the Pleistocene didn’t lead temperature, that only began in the late Holocene, when you jump CO2 100-ppm in 100-years it exceeds natural oceanic biochemistry so far we’re acidifying the oceans faster than a mass extinction:

            “The rate of acidification is 10-times faster or more than anything we have seen for the past 50-million years and perhaps over the last 300-million years.”.

            ICES ASC 2013 Plenary Lecture by Dr Richard Feely, 9:10 into 1:01:08; 14:30 in CO2 vertical maps; https://www.youtube.com
            /watch?v=etFob9Wy45E

            That’s not possible if CO2 isn’t leading temperature dumbbell, Ziggy Piggy can’t pass an oceanography test and is here acting like a fkn know-it-all and doesn’t know squat about anything he-she or bot posts.

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            My apologies. I usually read or watch all the material presented. Wanted to treat your material likewise and… promptly forgot about it.
            However, I just did.
            I am sure you wanted to prove to me that it was never warmer on the planet. I am not 100% sure that you also meant to show that CO2 drives the global temperature. Then you sent me something that proves the exact opposite. Did it just escape you in the first video that the narrator mentioned “sometimes it appears that the temperature is ahead”? Considering how the graph ends, I am sure the video is aimed at the super un-informed. All of a sudden it shows the CO2 line shoot up through the roof. The famous hockey stick! Did you not wonder why the temperature line was missing? Let me give you a hint… The temperature did not follow!
            Once again I had to put aside the following presentations, I needed to turn down the volume while being needed for something else. Sorry.
            However, I did not need to listen or read it all again. I recognized the faces of Tim Ball, Alfred Soo and Ian Clark. They are well known for their work, proving that CO2 always follows the rise of temperature!
            Sorry, buddy, Your videos show exactly the opposite of what you wanted me to learn.
            Seeing that you are as ill informed as you are, let me add another little tidbit. There is nothing to be alarmed about seeing the CO2 level increase to 300ppm. The optimum greenhouse level is a little over 1000ppm. In the past, the amount of Co2 exceeded many times 3000ppm. There was nothing dangerous about it. And it occurred both while we enjoyed dinosaurs and tropical climates and also while the planet was covered in ice.

          • timallard

            @disqus_8e3O1FV1Wq:disqus … states a few big turds nothing new, the first is this one, “They are well known for their work, proving that CO2 always follows the rise of temperature!”, and that’s only true before the Steam Age and never true for the Miocene, Pliocene and Pleistocene WHEN THE PLANET COOLS CO2 LEADS TEMPERATURE.

            Did you know enough geologic history to not pull your pants down for us all?

            Didn’t you know the Miocene was warmer CO2 higher than the Pliocene likewise CO2 higher temps warmer for the Pliocene and rock erosion-weathering removed the CO2mainly the rising Himalaya and the planet kept cooling, there was no polar ice during these epochs, look it up dumbbell, in any textbook.

            The next gross dufusness is, “There is nothing to be alarmed about seeing the CO2 level increase to
            300ppm. The optimum greenhouse level is a little over 1000ppm.”; oh sure, another dumbbell ring-a-ding rope-a-dope, the rate-of-change is what matters to life on planet earth not the absolute number CO2 reaches.

            The planet warmed 1C/1.8F during the Altithermal or mid-Holocene warming from an orbital variation and CO2 went from 255 to about 270-ppm, this 8,000-4,000-years ago and coincidentally the Sahara dries out during this time from its 20,000-year cycle, eh?

            We’ve raised global ocean temperatures about 1.7C/3.1F and it’s the heat-sink for the planet absorbing 93% of the excess heat, and the trauma lies ahead …

            When the Pleistocene ice-age happened from Milankovich cycles after the Isthmus of Panama closed after the Southern Ocean opened up, CO2 varied from 180-280ppm textbook numbers = 100-ppm and took about 100,000-years to do it since the change from 41,000-year cycles about 1.5My ago.

            So the maximum CO2 ever reached in the past 1.5-million years was 305±5-ppm we hit that in 1916 and flew on by adding 100-ppm since then, an entire variation for an ice-age in 100/100,000 = 1/1000th the time.

            Well that might be fine on a desert planet but we have oceans full of sea-life using calcium-carbonate for their shells, they do this chemically extracting aragonite in the end for their skeletons and exoskeletons and to do this takes a time-consuming interaction with the atmosphere in a constant, intimate, chemical bond.

            The other thing you learn if taking oceanography is that a global value of 7.9 pH is the you-die point for all these creatures.

            We’re barely at 8.1 anymore and pre-industrial was 8.2 or 30% less acidic than today, it’s a logarithmic scale not linear of hydrogen ions in the water Antarctic pteropods show acid etching and damage worse than ever seen.

            Well these plankton never experienced a 1/3 change in pH in their evolutionary paths over millions of years so they are dutifully dying off in large numbers the phytoplankton critical to all sea-life.

            That’s a main problem with this, is that the food-chain in the oceans is based on tiny plankton feeding bigger all the way up to fish we eat if you kill the plankton the big fish starve and they are.

            Within 60-years all Alaskan water will be at or below the aragonite saturation point, that’s the “acidic” chemical reaction to study affecting plankton and even people drinking acidic water have health problems so it’s universal to our lives as well.

            Ever eat King Crab? Gone in 60-years bubba’, enjoy while you can, isn’t that the mantra by Team Oligarch, “Let them eat cakes!” ?L?

            “Using An Environmental Intelligence Framework to Evaluate the Impacts of Ocean Acidification in the Arctic”; ARCUS D.C. Arctic Research Seminar Series – 31 March 2016; 55:32; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1kq7I3X5SY

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            So what’s your point? You sent information which proves exactly the opposite of your intent… Now you wish to cover up with insults, foul language and information which is irrelevant (incorrect?)?
            However, I am always interested to learn. Since you do have the time, why not, for starters, debunk Patrick Moore’s standard lecture. I had provided the link earlier, however, here it is again. It is embedded towards the end of the text.
            https://gseine.wordpress.com/2016/06/18/end-self-censorship-on-the-carbon-dioxide-debate/
            You also made a point that I should be concerned about the rate of change. Let me see, sea level rise has been unchanged at about 3mm pr. year. Global temperature has increased at about the same rate since about 1750. OK, here is your homework. When the layer of ice (about 2km) on top of the Vancouver area (20,000 to 10,000 years ago) started melting and the sea level rose 120 m, how much had the increased amount of CO2 (anthropogenic or otherwise) have to do with it? Or was there no additional CO2?
            You also left a previous question unanswered… When the CO2 line flew up at the end of the graph (the hockey stick) why did the temperature not follow as predicted by the computer module?

          • timallard

            @Ziggy Eckardt the point is you state lies, obfuscations, totally made up crap that is disgustingly false.

            What matters is we acidify the oceans 10-times faster than an extinction event and continue to burn shit for electrons due to political oppression.

            That’s the point, to end the Steam Age for electrons, most power on the grid is for thermal end-uses 80% !! … remove that by using solar-thermal HVAC and you just reduced grid demand 80%.

            The heat-transfer physics are very clear, using steam takes 2-Joules to put 1-watt on the wire the Joules are waste-heat heating the planet, they “get rid” of it using heat-exchangers and heat the air or a water mass with it to condense the steam.

            That’s another point here, to state the physics, my textbook of physics for engineers has as the example of proving steam is 40% efficient max used a nuke to do the math.

            Time to settle for solar-panels and windmills, solar-thermal collectors to storage and use that not burning shit and more shit until there’s shit everywhere, soot, smoke, chemical pollution burn more shit, burn plastics and burn TAR SANDS the last straw on that shit.

            The so-called “hockey stick” is just a graph to-scale, that’s it folks and what you see has never happened before in earth’s history.

            The last time anything close happened the heating lasted 200,000-years to return to the CO2 value where it started, 1/4th of emissions remain over 10,000-years.

            This is the story on that geologic past complete with citations on the graphs for those so inclined:

            “Global Warming 56 Million Years Ago: What it Means for Us”; Dr. Scott Wing, Smithsonian Museum of Nat’ History; 1:44:14; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81Zb0pJa3Hg
            [Temp chart duration: Solomon et al., 2009, PNAS]

          • Ziggy Eckardt

            “Ziggy… you state lies…” How would you know? You are obviously clueless! Why do you not respond or answer my questions? Or, just debunk Patrick Moore. That would prove something…

          • timallard

            Why is this person so sure about what I’m doing when I’m not doing that? Isn’t that a strawman argument? … “I am sure you wanted to prove to me that it was never warmer on the planet.”

            The only left to prove is to people trying not to solve the issues, our rate-of-change on carbon-dioxide is so beyond natural oceanic biochemistry they are acidifying 10-times faster than extinction events, let that sink in.

            The coercive power of carbonic acid in the oceans affects all sea-life dependent on calcium-carbonate or aragonite and the saturation point where it starts to dissolve, that affects shell formation and pteropods are already dying from this a major food for salmon.

            Talking about carbon-dioxide like it’s a number is stupid, it won’t pass a test in school on oceanography, get it dumbbell? What matters is the aragonite saturation point or you don’t get oysters:

            “The rate of acidification is 10-times faster or more than anything we have seen for the past 50-million years and perhaps over the last 300-million years.”.

            ICES ASC 2013 Plenary Lecture by Dr Richard Feely, 9:10 into 1:01:08; 14:30 in CO2 vertical maps; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etFob9Wy45E

            So go ahead and be a stupid anti-science troll here Ziggy Piggy, the Dalai Lama is found by a scientific protocol proven over centuries and his soul takes 2-5 years in Purgatory, how you doing dumbbell, got a few thousand years there going by messing with disrespecting the planet?

          • anthony divjak

            Sometime is necseary to reiterate the stance in debate as some like to get it muddy. I am against man made global warming theory and see it as a hoax that was developed for a specific reason to control and reduce mans footprint on the earth, literarly…….And no I will not apologize for my speeling.

            It is however thr ongoing issue of the deadly Ctrails over the populations that need to be addressed and stopped if we are to breathe clean air ever again!

          • Johnpd

            Al Gore showed a graph of CO2 correlating with temp. rises from Vostok ice core data. Only thing the liar didn’t point out was CO2 was 800 years behind temp. rises. Rising temps cause rising CO2, as the warming oceans outgas. Gore is a liar who has made $millions out of this fraud.

          • timallard

            Johnpd states what was true for the Pleistocene epoch yet hasn’t been true since the late Holocene because he’s not interested in reality, only parts of the past that support his fantasy.

            That fantasy is that we jumping carbon-dioxide 100-ppm in 100-years will do nothing because “temperature leads CO2” according to his defective observational acuity in geophysics and heat-transfer …

            The indelible evidence that this rate-of-change is grossly too-much-too-fast is that the oceans are acidifying 10-times faster than a mass extinction, pH is easy to measure and must be done for many industrial processes, eh?

            This isn’t grade school, “The rate of acidification is 10-times faster or more than anything we have seen for the past 50-million years and perhaps over the last 300-million years.”:

            ICES ASC 2013 Plenary Lecture by Dr Richard Feely, 9:10 into 1:01:08; 14:30 in CO2 vertical maps; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etFob9Wy45E

            100-ppm in 100-years is so beyond the aragonite saturation point to be lethal within another century to most commercial fisheries as it kills larval stages of 1/3 of sea-life along with a warming ocean to where the Great Barrier Reef can now be killed by about 1-month of oceans at 30C/86F or above, acidification is consider to make this more critical:

            “Once they expel all the algae, they die.”, a long-time observer of the reefs states, “There’s nothing at all from stopping one event, one El Niño from wiping out the Great Barrier Reef in a month.”; from “El Niño exacerbates Great Barrier Reef bleaching; Financial Times – World”; 3:39; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0k1xDo4VFA&t=16s

          • anthony divjak

            the oceans are being silently polluted with same Ctrail campaigns we on land are!. To think that aluminum, strontium, barrium, arsenic, mercury and lithium wont have effect on oceans is ludicrus . Stop IGNORING the Ctrails they are killing all forms of life!

          • Johnpd

            You repeat the warmist alarmist lies:
            The seas are Alkaline, not acid so they can’t be acidifying till they pass the neutral point, which they are nowhere near.
            Above 400 ppmv CO2 has a logarithmically decreasing effect on temperatures & zero effect on climate. It becomes insignificant.
            I recommend Prof. Ian Plimers book to you: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science.
            I also recommend Dr. Tim Ball’s book: The deliberate Corruption of Climate Science drtimball.com
            Also try http://www.c3headlines.com
            Click on “Quotes” to find the agenda of the 1%s pushing this scam:
            95% DEPOPULATION, DE-INDUSTRIALISATION & ONE WORLD TOTALITARIAN GOVT. Also many good articles & graphs.
            All this is now irrelevant: Trump just wiped the Whitehouse Climate Change page: the con game is dead. HAHAHAHA.

          • anthony divjak

            thank You John! I fully agree with Your statement! We have been lied to for far to long about this hoax! Hope that the responsible for it get dragged to the nation courts and be dealt with!

        • Kikr

          Johnpd, thank you for BAM, in Ena’s face! Do some simple research people, it’s all about making money for the dolts in the Democratic party. How Nazi of Gore and Lynch to tell the public they must be punished for not agreeing with them. I think after these past few months, I see just how sleezy Democrats are.

          • http://www.womanology.co.uk/ Andy Bodle

            NB, people: make sure you do your simple research on Breitbart or some fascist nutjob conspiracy theory site, otherwise you might not get the result Kikr predicts.

          • Kikr

            Blah blah blah with your whiny boring blah!

          • PissedoffinAZ

            We get that anything beyond six letter and two syllables is a bit beyond the ken of the troglodrumpfs. Stick with FAUX, NewsMux and Breitfart. About your speed.

          • Kikr

            Obama and Al Gore were both involved in founding the Chicago Carbon Exchange. Gore also owns a carbon-credit investment firm; Generation Investment Management.

            Global warming is an excuse for depopulation and global government published by the Club of Rome in 1972 in “The First Global Revolution” and in “Limits to Growth”. Al Gore is a Club of Rome member. Edmond de Rothschild describes the UN’s environment plan as a means of fulfilling Cecil Rhodes’ last will; global control by the British Empire, and global British race and c ulture, eliminating “Lilliputians of lesser race” 9Abeldanger links)

            green-agenda.com.

            naturalclimatechange.us

            Club of Rome members were chosen from the Committee of 300, the “Olympians”.

            Colorado environmentalist and CPA George Hunt attended the 1987 4th World Wilderness Conference and 1992 UNCED Conference and published his videos and audio recordings years ago. Abeldanger has great articles on the AGW NWO Rothschild banker’s scam:

            “How Edmund de Rothschild Managed to Let 179 Governments Pay Him for Grasping Up to 30% of the Earth

            http://www.abeldanger.net/2011

            British Imperium – Racism – Exhaling CO2 as Death Warrant – Moving to the Carbon Economy – Global Lilliputians

            Source: Public service message brought to you by your favorite Abel Danger Global Team of “Lilliputians”:

            September 11-18, 1987, in Denver and

            Estes Park, Colorado – George Hunt: UNCED Earth Summit 1992 (population

            reduction, bank scams) – Transcript and Videos

            http://www.abeldanger.net/2010

          • PissedoffinAZ

            Save your breath. The vast majority of people including scientist have no financial stake. On the other hand, the robust whacko conspiracy folks make money every time one of you clicks.

          • pezcleo

            Wrong scientist have funding at stake. If there really isn’t a problem puff goes the grant money. On the other hand, no one who skeptical of global warming will get funded to do research right now.

          • zzz05

            And I hear Svante Arrhenius is heavily invested in carbon credits too.

          • Timothy C O’Keefe

            So are you saying that this news report is false?

          • Matt in the Box

            Abso-fucking-lutely.

            This article is such a big piece of shit it is perturbing Earth’s orbit.

          • Rob.

            No! Its telling us what most of us with an interest and intelect what we already knew!

          • Plinda Joblonski

            YES! As fake as the $3.00 bill you got in your change from the guy selling Rolex watches on the street corner for $7.00.

          • Kikr

            You’re partially right about democrats: Obama and Al Gore were both involved in founding the Chicago Carbon Exchange. Gore also owns a carbon-credit investment firm; Generation Investment Management.

            Global warming is an excuse for depopulation and global government published by the Club of Rome in 1972 in “The First Global Revolution” and in “Limits to Growth”. Al Gore is a Club of Rome member. Edmond de Rothschild describes the UN’s environment plan as a means of fulfilling Cecil Rhodes’ last will; global control by the British Empire, and global British race and c ulture, eliminating “Lilliputians of lesser race” 9Abeldanger links)

            green-agenda.com.

            naturalclimatechange.us

            Club of Rome members were chosen from the Committee of 300, the “Olympians”.

            Colorado environmentalist and CPA George Hunt attended the 1987 4th World Wilderness Conference and 1992 UNCED Conference and published his videos and audio recordings years ago. Abeldanger has great articles on the AGW NWO Rothschild banker’s scam:

            “How Edmund de Rothschild Managed to Let 179 Governments Pay Him for Grasping Up to 30% of the Earth

            http://www.abeldanger.net/2011

            British Imperium – Racism – Exhaling CO2 as Death Warrant – Moving to the Carbon Economy – Global Lilliputians

            Source: Public service message brought to you by your favorite Abel Danger Global Team of “Lilliputians”:

            September 11-18, 1987, in Denver and

            Estes Park, Colorado – George Hunt: UNCED Earth Summit 1992 (population

            reduction, bank scams) – Transcript and Videos

            http://www.abeldanger.net/2010

          • Ena Kana

            Excuse for depopulation? And what is your excuse for thinking that humans should be able to completely saturate all biomes???

          • anthony divjak

            IF the intentional poisoning of the atmosphere brought to the halt, we might have a chance to live! more to the point, our children might!
            As to Your view, You seem to only see the proverbial Carbon emissions and totally chose to ignore
            UN agenda program to pollute the air and destroy food basket world wide. Can you say UN (man made)?
            For some reason ,YOU dont seem to get it YET, but you might soon. Soon but to late!

            By the same token, if California, for example has adequate percipitation in form of rain and snow, it can INCREASE the food production accordingly. Wast areas of the world are still un populated and keept for future play grounds of the elite, which excludes You and me….

          • rochesternative

            because PEOPLE unlike animals, can reason and can make judgements in ways that animals cannot. Therefore, if a problem arises, we are able to figure our way around it. Thus the starvation that was predicted in the 70’s and 80’s from overpopulation never occurred.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            Makes ones’ head ache, doesn’t it, Andy?

          • Mollie Norris

            You’re partially right about democrats: Obama and Al Gore were both involved in founding the Chicago Carbon Exchange. Gore also owns a carbon-credit investment firm; Generation Investment Management.

            Global warming is an excuse for depopulation and global government published by the Club of Rome in 1972 in “The First Global Revolution” and in “Limits to Growth”. Al Gore is a Club of Rome member. Edmond de Rothschild describes the UN’s environment plan as a means of fulfilling Cecil Rhodes’ last will; global control by the British Empire, and global British race and culture, eliminating “Lilliputians of lesser race” (Abeldanger links)
            green-agenda.com.
            naturalclimatechange.us
            Club of Rome members were chosen from the Committee of 300, the “Olympians”.

            Colorado environmentalist and CPA George Hunt attended the 1987 4th World Wilderness Conference and 1992 UNCED Conference and published his videos and audio recordings years ago. Abeldanger has great articles on the AGW NWO Rothschild banker’s scam:

            “How Edmund de Rothschild Managed to Let 179 Governments Pay Him for Grasping Up to 30% of the Earth
            http://www.abeldanger.net/2011/07/edmund-de-rothschild-world-wilderness.html

            British Imperium – Racism – Exhaling CO2 as Death Warrant – Moving to the Carbon Economy – Global Lilliputians
            Source: Public service message brought to you by your favorite Abel Danger Global Team of “Lilliputians”:
            September 11-18, 1987, in Denver and
            Estes Park, Colorado – George Hunt: UNCED Earth Summit 1992 (population
            reduction, bank scams) – Transcript and Videos
            http://www.abeldanger.net/2010/05/british-imperium-racism-exhale-co2-is.html

          • Kikr

            Great information Mollie, thanks!

          • Ena Kana

            You guys are the epitome of ignorance—the thing I cannot figure out is why ignorant people would ever want to pretend that they AREN’T ignorant. I dunno, it all seems very dishonest to ME.
            Earth is a finite system. Earth is shared by over 8 million other species. I KNOW YOU LIVE IN A TINY WORLD THAT IS YOUR BRAIN BUT THE REAL WORLD IS MUCH MORE INTERESTING and full of complexity that your simple minds cannot comprehend. If only your parents aborted you idiots the world might have a chance but I fear the world is doomed do to being saturated with not only Homo sapiens but Super Duper Homo Stupideous.
            Discard your beliefs and discover EMPIRICISM you wretched, basic animals.

          • Kenneth Breitling

            Ena, if anyone should have been aborted, it is you! In all of your comments there is nothing (absolutely nothing) of substance. I only read your high school platitudes and grammar school name calling. Then you proceed to accuse people of only getting their info from CBS and Trinity Broadcasting only to follow that with more name calling. There are only two words in all you have said that are relevant to anything: Planning and Causation, yet you do not follow that up with substance. You are truly the inept liberal. A snowflake who does not bring any intelligence to the debate. I have stated that a paper is currently being peer reviewed that shows faulty math was found to be used. The paper also shows that not only improper assumptions were made, but ridiculous assumptions.

            But I refuse to give you my source information. Go get it yourself, it’s there to be found! Shit how hard is it to Google “Peer review refuting man-made global climate change” or some other such search? Also, several others in this thread, such as Molly, have put forth their premise and explanations for their argument w/ source information, yet you still continue to throw out your childish platitudes and name calling and not refute any particular part of what they are bringing to the debate! You are arguing something you know absolutely nothing about! It seems to me you like to argue for the sake of arguing. I feel sorry for those around you who have to endure you! BTW – what part of depopulating the planet does not also fall under Planning and Causation from that Planning?

          • Ena Kana

            I cannot stand belligerent ignorance. If you are ignorant, that is fine, I will help you but if you are both ignorant and a preacher of ignorance well then I have no sympathy because your brain has become a danger to Homo sapiens and all other forms of life on Earth.
            I follow one thing above all else: REASON. Reason is the path to real information, if you disagree with me than you disagree with REASON and if you aren’t reason-powered than you must be belief-powered.
            So Mr. Kenneth Breitling, please inform the rest of us why your thinking is superior to science? “I refuse to give my sources of information” is a pretty ignorant statement from someone entering an intellectual debate.

          • Sugarsail1

            then stop being ignorant and belligerent and you’ll be better.

          • Gene Woody

            What does Ena have to say about “the next ice age” during the 70’s? It was supposed to happen because of the same reason “global warming” a decade ago. Now its called “climate change” which has been happening since I was a tyke some 70 years ago.

          • Karen Willet

            Indeed. I remember back in the 70s/80s we were being told we were already too late to save the planet and we only had about 10 years left before Global Warming destroyed us.

          • rochesternative

            and don’t forget, if Global Warming didn’t get us the USSR was going to. We were doomed. HOWEVER did we survive?

          • Lee
          • Mister_Jim

            Global Warming / Climate Change has been going on much longer than since you were a tyke.It’s been going on longer than there has been records of history, (and that included records from research like core samples etc.).
            Of course “Climate Change” is real. If it wasn’t real we’d still be in the great “Ice Age”. Better yet, if not for climate change, the “Ice Age” would have never started. It’s the part about being “Man Made” that’s bullshit.

          • Lee

            you are the one who is speaking bullshit. Mister Jum.

            What you fail to understand is the simple term, “rate of change”. sure the climate changes, always have, always will, but the RATE OF CHANGE has never been the same. The rate of change right now is due to the amount of CO2 being released by man made activities.

            I know I have just schooled you on simple scientific terms.

            You ignoramus

          • Mister_Jim

            You haven’t schooled anyone on anything. To make an opinionated statement with no factual basis is not a valid argument in any situation.
            I just looked up “ignoramus” in one of the many online dictionaries and I saw your picture. You were standing in the foreground of an image of an erupting volcano saying “There’s no carbon dioxide there, it won’t change the climate as much as my carpool all starting to drive individually.”

            Look at the facts as they really are instead of your liberal influenced perception of history and our current situation..

          • Lee

            Hey Mr Jim, I followed your advice and I looked up “ignoramus” in the online dictionary, I found a photo of you? It was weird because I also looked up the word “retarded” and I saw your photo again. Surely you can’t be both??

            Just an FYI.. Volcanoes emit CO2, but not nearly as much as human are putting out. You might like to look up (I challenge you to do it), the scientific research of Co2 emissions vs Human emissions from Co2 . Here aree a few links to help youi.

            Jun 15, 2016 – Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. – Source: climate.gov (https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities)

            Also, another…
            “According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes,
            both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon
            dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities
            cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide.
            Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves:
            Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent
            of those generated by today’s human endeavors.” Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/

            But you believe what you want, doesn’t make you correct. You a very ignorant and wrong. Science backs me up, not you :).

            After you do this, take a photo of yourself crying, and then upload to one of your online dictionaries against the word “schooled” which is what i have just done to you.

          • Mister_Jim

            “Hey Mr Jim, I followed your advice and I looked up “ignoramus” in the
            online dictionary, I found a photo of you? It was weird because I also
            looked up the word “retarded” and I saw your photo again. Surely you
            can’t be both??”
            Don’t underestimate my abilities, I am truly multi-talented.
            I can follow your links to read something that backs up your opinion and I could easily share links that back up my opinion. I’m not going to do it because it’s not worth my effort.

            Scientific research and the internet are like that, you can find something to back up any opinion. Al Gore got filthy rich doing it, and he continues to rake in piles of money from gullible liberals and idiots. (Please excuse the redundancy) If I stop exhaling that would probably make you happy but the reduction in Co2 output would be less than insignificant but it would allow more oxygen for a liberal to breathe so I’ll not take that option based on that principle.
            Have a great Memorial Day weekend and please remember to honor our fallen veterans. (That’s what this holiday is about). If you do decide to celebrate it as a day for a picnic please don’t light your grill, it will consume oxygen and emit carbon dioxide and the world as we know it will come to an end even sooner.

          • Deborah

            Give me stats on that, please. Do you know that CO2 is necessary for plants and animals to survive, Just like the nitrogen that we breathe. The main activity that man contributes to CO2 is exhaling.

          • Lee

            The rate of change? You want the rate of change on CO2 increase compared to historical.

            Well, do yourself a favour, and type these words into Google. “CO2 rate of change concentration” You will find all the answers. I shouldn’t be the one to educate you and fill in your knowledge gaps. Try educating yourself. Maybe you need to go back to school?

            FYI – Nitrogen is an inert gas. It is not used by our body’s chemistry. You are really dumb Deborah.

            FYI – C02 is important for life, but too much in the atmosphere creates a warming affect, just like a greenhouse.

            FYI – Did you know, basic chemistry, that increased level of CO2 is causing ocean acidity. Ye,s go ask a high school science teacher. The CO2 mixes with the water and increases the oceans acidity. Did you know this Deborah??

            “The main activity that man contributes to CO2 is exhaling.” – now I know you are just playing with me, 🙂 so retarded

            CO2 emission sources, look this up in Google.

            Thanks, the aliens wont visit us because of you.

          • Deborah

            The air that we breathe is approximately 70+ % Nitrogen. Look that up. The ocean that makes up more than 70% of the world is affected by the fishing industry, human waste. industrial waste, etc. As a superintendent of multiple farms over the past 45 yrs. I have learned much about chemistry. The food industry is another polluter, of our world. Everything is about money. If you can convince billions of polluters that they need to not be avarice, then our earth would have a chance. otherwise not. Humans have made earth a dumping ground. As a retired person, I grow a good portion of my own food.
            Also as a farmer, I have seen the weather change, and it will continue to. The cycle has been in existence for Millions, if not more, of years. Homo sapiens have caused the beginnings of the destruction of a most beautiful planet. No matter how much $$$$$$$$$$$ is used to clean up this planet, it will be thrown good after bad, s waste, unless each and every human changes their avarice habits. That is not going to happen. Our enviornment is caused by human behavior. In the stratosphere there’re minimum changes, and almost non existence, and the lower atmosphere is where the pollution stays. We have friends that work for NASA, and they have said that no one in that industry is in agreement with the’Climate Change people.

          • Lee

            Deborah, truly you are brain dead. Go to you doctor, have them check your brain is still inside.

            Our bodies DO NOT USE Nitrogen gas in its chemistry.

            “Nitrogen, in the form of N2 (which is the
            gas present in the atmosphere), is incredibly inert. That is to say,
            it’s stable- it doesn’t really want to react with anything anymore. When
            you breathe in N2, you breathe out N2. It hasn’t changed and hasn’t
            been absorbed by your body (at least in any significant way). Thus, it
            is neither good nor bad for you- it’s useless (nitrogen content of air
            becomes very important when diving at great depths, but for the general
            purpose of this question it’s not important).”

            https://www.quora.com/If-the-air-is-78-nitrogen-and-21-oxygen-why-do-we-say-we-breathe-in-oxygen-but-not-nitrogen

            So just like nitrogen gas and its effect on our body’s chemistry…. your opinion on this mater is also USELESS.

            “Our environment is caused by human behavior.” – no, the environment is fine without humans. Humans are responsible for a CHANGING environment. If humans were not here, the environment would do just fine without us.

            “As a retired person, I grow a good portion of my own food.” – that is very good. I commend you. Maybe you are not so stupid after all. Organic foods are the best. Industrialized farming is very bad in my opinion due to the pesticides, fertilizers and other chemicals used.

            “We have friends that work for NASA, and they have said that no one in
            that industry is in agreement with the’Climate Change people” the climate change people?? You mena most people?? What you may not understand is that the oil and gas indutsry are the ones who have put millions of dollars into misinformation and fake news about climate change. Scientist do not care about opinion, they care about observations and measurements. Do not listren to businessmen, politicians, economists about the affect on the planet from global warming, listen to the scientist because they are the experts.

            If you have a health problem, do you go to a politician or Billionaire to ask for advice or a Doctor?? So when it comes to the environment, you go see a scientist!

          • GENUG

            800 year lag between an event and CO2 rise – the recent “rise” is from an event 800 years ago. that can be verified. the ocean’s acidity: we are reconfiguring the analysis – seems the oceans absorb and release CO2. humans are not responsible for climate shift – it’s cyclical – look up “abrupt climate change” – eye opener.

          • Lee

            NO, NO, NO.

            There is cycles through large time frames. Do not take the lowest point from a “little ice age” 800 years ago. That is not how science works.

            https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

            Look at this graphs. Do not just cherry pick facts and use them out of context. That is poor analysis.

            What qualifications do you have in this area? Please humour me.

            https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png/300px-Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png

          • Lee

            HAHAH, I smash you with science and i defeat you with logic. I am knowledgeable and have qualifications in this area. And I am a research before. #ButtHurt

          • Lee
          • Buddy

            “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.”

            — George Orwell —

            “Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident that they are acting on their own free will.”

            – Joseph Goebbels

            “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

            ― Mark Twain

          • Roman Marquez

            We got the “brain whisperer” here offering to “help”.

          • Stevon f. Nutt

            You do realize that you are describing yourself?

          • Samuel Clemons

            ‘You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.’
            “All this argument is the temperature going up or not, it’s absurd… Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.”
            Reid A. Bryson holds the 30th PhD in Meteorology granted in the history of American education. Emeritus Professor and founding chairman of the University of Wisconsin Department of Meteorology now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences in the 1970s he became the first director of what’s now the UWs Gaylord Nelson Institute of Environmental Studies. He’s a member of the United Nations Global 500 Roll of Honor created, the U.N. says, to recognize outstanding achievements in the protection and improvement of the environment. He has authored five books and more than 230 other publications and was identified by the British Institute of Geographers as
            “the most frequently cited climatologist in the world.”

          • sammy

            Why don’t shut up and go away? You are not changing any minds with your BS. You are certainly are not a intellectual or have any common sense. You certainly do not know anything about weather. And lastly we know you have a sh*t storm in your head and you can’t see sh*t.

          • James

            Ena you are NOT using reason, you have fallen for propaganda. How many scientists make up that 98%? How many of the “98%” are even in the climate field?? Science covers a lot. Reason says that if the world’s climate has been changing since the world has been here, then climate change is inevitable. Reason says that if climate change was occurring even before the arrival of man, then it is obvious we cannot affect the climate as people say we can. Reason says that if we cannot even accurately or dependably make it rain or control the weather, then we cannot change the climate. And reason also says that the millions of poor people in the Third World don’t give a rat’s ass about climate change because they just need to eat and pushing this agenda will just make it even harder for them to eat due to rising costs attributable to C02 penalties. Reason says that unless the Third World gets fully on board with these programs, the First World cannot possibly change anything on it’s own because it is from the Third World where the majority of the C02 is coming from. Reason says, that being the case, go to China, India, Africa and tell THEM to change.

          • pezcleo

            Where comes masters college project. The mailed 10,000 a two question survey. 3000 were returned but only 75 had both question answered. The 2nd one was about global warming. 73 of 75 said yes. Any study asked meteorologist and 67 % said no to believing in man made global warming.

          • Okie Girl

            YOU ARE THE IGNORANT ONE. The rest of us have studied actual scientific research. Grow up Grasshopper, GROW UP!

          • xtasea

            People from your universe must have a different kind of REASON which has no basis in fact.

          • PursueJustice

            Sure doesn’t sound like you are using reason. I think you are more delusional. Science is good when used properly. But when it becomes wedded to politics, not so good. And when it becomes a way to make money, not so good. And worst of all, when science tries to shut down opposing views, then it it is really useless. You keep using “science” like a magic word. It isn’t. There is blatant misuse of science when it comes to the climate change hoax. People like you have been completely deceived.

          • destroyeroflibs

            Fuck you slut

          • Lee

            Don’t worry, these guys are really dumb. I can support you as this is my area of understanding.

          • Okie Girl

            No you cannot. Please see through the global lies. You’re being used as a “Useful Idiot.” (Google that term.) http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/simple-chart-destroys-the-liberal-climate-change-scam

          • Lee

            The provenance of the drawing (it couldnt be called a graph) appears to
            be “climatologist” Cliff Harris. His background is insurance law and has
            no science publications.

            Get the correct data before jumping to conclusions. If it doesnt come
            from peer-reviewed science, then chances are someone is trying to
            mislead you – usually because proposed action is incompatible with
            political beliefs.

            https://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1095&p=3

            http://lefthandpalm.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/dodgy-cliff-and-randy-mann.html

          • Roc RIzzo

            The human race, especially the Americans are undergoing a phase of devolution. They are going backwards on the evolutionary scale, because many are not provided the resources to evolve their minds and beliefs.

          • Buddy

            Self loathing is what drives your insanity!

          • RedNekTex

            You were totally destroyed by Kenneth Breitling above. You are devoid of substance. Your name calling and insults are but ephemeral mist. Go away wannabe troll or bring some substance to the debate. You have none save proof of your vitriol.

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            Name calling and demagoguery is the leftist default. Except for gravity, science is never finished, like they claim “climate change” is. We used to call it weather. By her comments, Ena Kana is not a scientist, but one of the hysterical left; someone who is incapable of having a intellectual discussion without getting nasty and therefore not worth responding to.

          • John A. Smith

            We should be thankful for it. They put the noose around their own neck all the time and get in a long line to repeat it despite the obvious lessons they are too arrogant to learn. Continue on, you thought and speech fascists. The rest of us love what you are doing to yourselves.

          • Scott Schymick

            That’s a great way to frame it unless the hysteria leads to government taking away our civil liberties – you know, the few we have left remaining

          • Lee

            Gravity is finished?? What nonsense. They are making discoveries all the time about gravity. The most recent major one is that the speed of gravity is equivalent to the speed of light. Reference: TANG, Ke Yun; HUA ChangCai; WEN Wu; CHI ShunLiang; YOU QingYu; YU Dan (February 2013). “Observational evidences for the speed of the gravity based on the Earth tide” (PDF). Chinese Science Bulletin. 58 (4-5): 474–477. doi:10.1007/s11434-012-5603-3. Retrieved 12 June 2013.

            Also, Particles mediating:
            Not yet observed (Graviton hypothesised)…..

            Dont speak about topics you only have an opinion on. You dont know what you are talking about.

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            Throw anything up in the air and it will fall down. It does exist. Whether we learn more info on it is immaterial to my statement. It exists. You are just be argumentative, if that is all you can add to this discussion. You spend too much time on the internet. Go outside and toss a ball around.

          • Lee

            Yes, I am aware of acceleration due to gravity. When I am studying Physics we use 9.81 m/s^2. But there is so much we still don’t know about gravity. Your understanding is that of a common or simpleton. You are not a scientist or an engineer. Yet you feel compelled to make comment as though you are an authority.

            You wrote “Except for gravity, science is never finished”…. Gravity is still being studied and it is not finished. Fact!

            I am not being argumentative, i am correcting your statement which was factually incorrect. The same way I am correcting others on this fake news article page.

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            And what makes you think I do not also have a degree in science and have not studied, physics, chemistry, biology, immunology …etc? Becasue you are an arrogant leftist? I made a simple, light statement and you go warrior on me. My son has his PhD in aerospace engineering . Would you like to discuss it with him? But he wouldn’t waste his precious time on someone like you. He actual works, which apparently you do not. Your insults and name calling reflect back on you and exactly who you are.

          • Lee

            I know you don’t because of the way you write and your understanding of scientific principles. I am not left or right, but it is interesting that you label someone straight away. You could be just as easily names an ignorant right leaning conservative, but I wouldn’t say, I just think you are ignorant and unqualified. If your son is PhD in Engineering, does that make you one? If my mom is a Doctor , does that make me a Doctor?? Answer No.

            I actually work, I have 1 company and 1 small business. I also just sold another company. What makes you you think I don’t work? I worked last night, the day before that, etc. I work almost everyday. You are just upset I called you out.

            Now go and read and research why this article is false. Type into Google “10,000 Scientists, Hoax, climate change”

            It is so easy to win against people like you.

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            Unless you are arguing that gravity is not real, than you are arguing with me just because you are a schmuck. And if you are so busy, then why do you have time trolling websites? I made one commit, You are the one that keeps continuing this asinine conversation and I have wasted enough I’ve my time with you.

          • Lee

            Who is arguing that gravity is not real? Probably some of the dummies supporting this silly article.

            I correct you, you said “Except for gravity, science is never finished” and that is an incorrect statement. And I have given you examples where they are discovering new things about gravity all the time. That is science, it makes discoveries.

            I am not trolling websites, I am merely here highlighting how stupid some people are here, how they do not understand science, how they are often unqualified, do not understand scientific method and principles, they think they understand complex issues which they do not.

            The only asinine conversation is those who claim climate change/global warming is a hoax, that is people like you.

            You have only wasted your time if you have not learnt anything.

          • Deborah

            Learned

          • Lee

            No, It can be learned or learnt

            Please understand English. If you do not believe me, then look up Oxford English Dictionary.

            “These are alternative forms of the past tense and past participle of the verb learn. Both are acceptable, but learned is often used in both British English and American English, while learnt is much more common in British English than in American English”

            Did you also know that we spell colour instead of color.

            Waiting for an apology.. but you wont give one.

          • Deborah

            You are correct. It isn’t often used and I have heard it enough from uneducated people. I misspell words and often do not use an appropriate word. Sometimes I forget the proper word to use, also. Aging is damaging my electrons. I do not put people down for any lack on their part. I think it is a human error, and the variable influences in their life.

          • Paladin Roy

            I have one for you about gravity. You have a pound of lead and a pound of feathers. You drop them both from 100 ft at the same time and the lead will land first. …. The feathers separate and are still floating to the ground after the lead is already there. … Bwaa haa haaa !!!!

          • Lee

            …and you have heard of air resistance? Or drag? That answers your question.

            https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/falling.html

            Try doing your experiment in a vacuum and you will find they fall at the same speed. A vacuum has no air, therefore no resistance.

          • john

            He may have stayed in a holiday inn express last night …

          • Deborah

            It should be below your dignity to use colloquialisms and name calling in your missives.

          • Roc RIzzo

            And I have a PhD in Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry and Botany. And I am calling YOU a liar!

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            And what did I lie about, troll? I do have a BSc. and to earn that I had to study chemistry, biology, immunology, physics, organic chemistry …etc. You no nothing about me, yet call me a liar. Typical troll behavior.

          • Roc RIzzo

            Not so much that you lie, but that you believe lies and the trash that is being spewed here. I think that with all your science study, you overlooked English, and flunked spelling. When you state,”You no nothing about me,…” It should be “know,” as in having awareness of, not “no” as is the negative. Just saying.

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            Congratulations, you are doing a wonderful job of emulating Sheldon Cooper. On my part it was just poor typing skills. I have small hands and the keyboard “keys” are spread out more than those that were on typewriters. You on the other hand are being obnoxious, just like the character Sheldon Cooper. Just saying.

          • Roc RIzzo

            I’ll be damned if I know who Sheldon Cooper is, so I have no idea what you are talking about. Oh, and everyone finds excuses when they fail.

          • rochesternative

            Sheldon Cooper is a geeky (physicist I think) from Big Bang Theory TV show..

          • NoOneCaresAboutYou

            What about a show? Watching the big bang does not make you a scientist. Lol

          • rochesternative

            merely responding to Roc Rizzo above

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            First you call me a liar and then have to back track. Then you hit me on poor spelling. I never claimed that spelling or typing was my forte in any language. Liars are those who say something when they know it is false. The liars are those who say that man made climate change is an indisputable fact and that the science is finished. , (However they said it, this is not a direct quote.) You claim you have a PhD in Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry and Botany. Then why are you not spending your time doing research, running experiments, writing proposals, papers …etc, instead of wasting your time on this (and other) threads attacking people. You, Lee and others are not attacking ideas or opinions, but the people who have them. Basically that makes you not very nice people.

          • Roc RIzzo

            I am done with my research. I am retired. I have done my share of being nice to people who think that they know it all. In my late days, I shall be mean, very mean!

          • Colin Spencer

            Never too old to learn.

          • Colin Spencer

            You do need to get out more, Roc. Now, go and do your homework. It is past your bed time

          • NoOneCaresAboutYou

            It is directed at you. Not your son.

          • NoOneCaresAboutYou

            There is a whole field studing gravity waves rippling throughout space. We have stations on earth that are attempting to detect it.
            You are absolutely correct.

          • Deborah

            Ask an astronaut, and they will tell you that gravity is an important equation in their travels. It has to be precise, so yes it is still studied.

          • Roc RIzzo

            But Gravity is a theory. It really doesn’t exist. It is just there so that a few people can make money.

          • rochesternative

            I thought gravity was one of the laws of science?

          • Lee
          • Buddy

            I’ll take predicting the effects of gravity on you should you jump out a window from the fiftieth floor over this;

            NY Times No Snow in Future: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/08/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-snow.html?_r=2

            Snow sets Historic Records in Boston: http://www.wcvb.com/weather/snow-sets-historic-records-in-boston/31168556

            MSNBC Blames Buffalo Snow on Global Warming: http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/20/msnbc-blames-buffalo-snowstorm-on-of-course-global-warming-video/

            Bill Nye Blames Blizzards on Climate Change: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/397229/bill-nye-blames-blizzard-climate-change-because-course-brendan-bordelon

            January 2015: De Blasio Order Indefinite Street Shutdown Over Blizzard: http://observer.com/2015/01/de-blasio-orders-indefinite-street-shutdown-tonight-during-blizzard/#ixzz3PyDQuMeB

            ABC Envisioned Apocalyptic 2015 Triggered by Climate Change: http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/29/flashback-abc-news-envisioned-apocalyptic-world-triggered-by-climate-change-video/

            6/30/2015 Redford Moderate Weather Going Extinct, December May be Our Last Chance: http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/06/29/robert-redford-moderate-weather-going-extinct-december-may-be-our-last-chance/

            I could go on and on but, why?

          • NoOneCaresAboutYou

            Weather and climate are two totally different balls of wax.

          • Deborah

            Weather and climate go hand in hand. There’re many aspects to be studied to connect whether to climate. If you read the definition of either, one will see the are companions.

          • NoOneCaresAboutYou

            The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere “behaves” over relatively long periods of time. So no, they are not the same.

          • Tom Best

            Deborah didn’t say they were the same… she said they go “hand-in-hand”… on that point she is correct.

          • Rami Eskola

            Yes, essentially they ate the same. Only two variables: time span and geographical span.

          • Barney Tumey

            Science is study and learning. Science is never finished, even with gravity.

          • Marcia (Freemer) Kar

            Kind of late to the game aren’t you? Do you know how old this post is? And like the others, you missed the nuance of the whole point.

          • Michael Perkins

            Kenneth you cannot abort a non life form, I am sure Ena has not reach the evolutionary stage in development yet, if you believe in evolution. I accept a master designer, master creator, the One so I call him God for a title. As we are limited we only accept one time phase, as if it was only that simple. Everything is so divine and integrated and backed up and all in the same order of progression, it never could be mutated accidents of occurrence as some try to feed us. All is too refined and complex yet basically very simple, so perfection does not happen by accident like South Pole has had 5 melts in past and 3 melts absolute melts. Nature knows what it is doing and we stop.we are being environmental vandals. Cheers

          • George Sparks

            Kenny, I’M telling mom you you spelled the poop word! lol

          • David William Pomarnke

            No. Ena is correct. We would all be much better off if the crooks & morons who dispute the reality of climate change ceased to exist.

          • http://www.truthanddare.ca Patti Lindgren Gera

            I’d put my money on Ena as a paid troll. The method is textbook.

          • Susan Perreira

            Such a sad commentary. Devoid of reasoning.

          • Mark982

            Probably just a troll who delights in angering others to respond. Sad is right.

          • anthony divjak

            State your case, are you for or against the global warming joke!

            and get to the point!

          • Ena Kana

            I have studied weather and climate under a University Ph.D., and I can tell you that CO2 is a heat retaining molecule. Since our civilization outputs VAST amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere that is not naturally occurring and is far outside this naturally occurring “background rate” of CO2 release, the atmosphere and the oceans are warming at an alarming rate. Because CO2 has a life expectancy of 150 years, you might see that tackling the carbon problem NOW is essential to limiting future warming. This is science, not opinion.

          • Sugarsail1

            Science isn’t about “telling” anyone what is truth (that’s religion), it’s about presenting a falsifiable hypothesis that we can test empirically. Unfortunately, the anthropogenic global warming theory is not a falsifiable hypothesis, and thus, according to Karl Popper at least, it’s junk science. What I mean by falsifiable is not that it’s false or true, but since we have no way to empirically demonstrate what the earth’s climate would behave like if there were no humans we can’t say what part of climate change is attributable to humans. This is why climatologists have been forced to over rely on computer modeling, which is by it’s very nature non-empirical but virtual and has been extraordinarily incorrect so far. Additionally, predictions are by their nature non empirical since the future isn’t here yet. What’s more, is presumptions that a warming earth, more rich in CO2 will necessarily be detrimental have been already refuted by the geological record, it is much more likely to be beneficial to all life for the most part.

          • Bill Erickson

            Sugarsail1, Well put I cannot improve on your paragraph.

          • rochesternative

            There is NO PROOF that any amount of action that we as Americans could take would outweigh the “damage” being done by developing countries. So…short of the stone age, I’ll take my chances for myself and my children and continue to use my heat, air conditioning, and my car that runs on oil. If you want to go all Fred Flintstone, have at it, but don’t try to legislate MY behavior..

          • Lee

            Electric cars are the way of the future, your gas guzzler is inefficient and slower than an electric car. Just ask Elon Musk

          • Corruption_Eruption

            I think you should ask for a refund from this university. There’s also science behind the earth absorbing large amounts of CO2, and in the case of plants and trees, gives us oxygen in return. If anything it just makes them grow faster thus absorbing more. Not to mention the atmosphere vents a great deal of it and does so much earlier than the flawed computer model used by global warming alarmist ‘specialists’. Look into the Japanese satellite that launched sometime ago. It shows actual CO2 output by country. Just about every country except Brazil, Africa, and China absorb more than they put out. Here were times in the past where CO2 were way higher with no adverse effect.

          • John A. Smith

            I’ve just read “Barrow’s Boys,” about the long-time leader of the Royal Geographic Society and the filling in the of world map during his tenure. He oversaw the Northwest Passage explorations in which detailed records were kept in the early 1800s and continued long after his death when the Polar Expeditions of the early 1900s both north and south were happening. The book had nothing to do with climate change, of course, but even by their records of what latitudes they met ice and polar wildlife, temperatures, etc, should not be ignored. Great fluctuation through the decades.

          • Corruption_Eruption

            That’s just it. If these people were really concerned about the earth and civilization we would be using the money to study and attempt to understand what is actually behind serious climate change. We are not going to be able to do anything to prevent it but maybe we could understand it enough to know what to expect but no, they funnel billions into the pseudoscience that pushes the agenda. It’s completely absurd. It’s just shows that it is all about the money, power, and control. There was once deserts covered in water and plant life has been discovered under ice sheets all of which occurred without human intervention.

          • xtasea

            I don’t understand why more people, if they’re so concerned about excess CO2, why aren’t more people clamoring for more TREES? Boggles my mind…

          • Larbear49

            Ena Kana- A PhD also stands for a Plain High school Diploma.

          • Steven Paul

            Ena is fos

          • John A. Smith

            Ena knows everything. The NYT and Salon told her what she needs to know.

          • Lee

            No, it stands for a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD, Ph.D., or DPhil; Latin Philosophiae Doctor)

          • Larbear49

            Lee- I’m not that stupid I know what it stands for and I am not impressed.

          • Joanie Dornak Wharff

            A college degree does NOT guarantee COMMON SENSE!!!!! I’ve known WAY TOO MANY ….. MULTIPLE DEGREES…..& DUMB AS A ROCK when it comes to just plain COMMON SENSE !!!!!

          • trump blast

            Try pro humunous dominous !!! Or for the lazy pro human domination !!!

          • Anonymous Me

            And as a scientist you know rain reduces co2, and that in the earth early history co2 was much higher and lead to lush vegetation. First the left had the Ice age crisis, it was disproven, then global warning, less than 1 degree in 30 years and zero warming since 2000, now its climate change crisis. One crisis after another to scare people and create wealth.

          • Lee

            Are you unaware what ocean acidity is and the affect increased levels of carbon dioxide affect it. There are some very ignorant people commenting on this page.

          • Bill Erickson

            There sure are. I knew it when I started reading your comment.

          • rochesternative

            well here is a quote from National Geographic…even though most of that organization is a bunch of commie libs: “When carbon dioxide dissolves in this ocean, carbonic acid is formed. … Today, it is around 8.1, a drop of 0.1 pH units, representing a 25-percent increase in acidity over the past two centuries. Carbon Storehouse. The oceans currently absorb about a third of human-created CO2 emissions, roughly 22 million tons a day” So the OCEAN is ABSORBING the CO2 that you people are all wigged out about…and that 1/3 doesn’t include all that plants on the rest of the planet absorb. Rest easy, you are not going to die from Global Warming, an Ice Age, or Climate Change. Your chances of being hit by an 18 wheeler are far more.

          • Lee

            And what happens when the ocean absorbs it?? It goes acidic. Hence ocean acidity. And this metric is increasing.
            May I ask what qualifications you have in this area of environmental sustainability, oceanography or climate science?

            Clearing you do not understand the effects of climate change/global warming. When you compare getting hit by a truck it is not the same as specifies decline (due to climate change), rising sea levels, heating of our atmosphere, you clearly do not understand ‘rate of change’. Best go back and educate yourself in these topics. Do you argue with a Doctor when you are sick or need surgery or do you listen to their advice because they are better educate and knowledgeable.

            And who are these 10,000 scientist in the heading of this article?

          • Okie Girl
          • Lee

            “The provenance of the drawing (it couldnt be called a graph) appears to
            be “climatologist” Cliff Harris. His background is insurance law and has
            no science publications.”

            Do your research. I get my data and information from real scientists who are qualified.

            Have a look where you are going wring and how you are being duped into believing rubbish.

            https://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1095&p=3

          • Okie Girl

            I have studied this for years with my Dad, he was an engineer. No you are wrong. Climate Change is based on simply computer models, and so many lies have been spread along with it. Climategate ring a bell?
            Why would the propagandists have to lie?

            Weather men cannot get the weather straight even for a week, what makes you think they can possibly predict that far into the future? The further in time we go, the more the lies are exposed.
            According to Al Gore, Florida would be underwater by now.

            Good luck, you’re being played! Remember when the elites told the population the world was flat?
            (They knew better.) Weather has been used to manipulate the masses since Biblical times.
            Do your research, quit believing lies!

            “Now, a high-ranking member of the U.N’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has admitted that climate policy has little to do with environmental protection”.
            http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/11/ipcc_expert_admits_un_goal_is.html#ixzz4g4QIgBkL

          • Lee

            This is going to be fun…..

            “I have studied this for years with my Dad, he was an engineer.” – Are you an engineer?? Answer: NO.

            Just because someone you know or related to you is somehting does not mean you are. You are trying to say, because my dad is an engineer, that means I am one too.

            My mother is a Doctor, does that make me a Doctor?? Answer: NO

            Guess what, I am an engineer with an honours degree. And a Masters Degree. You do not have any qualifications.

            Why are you changing the topic to flat Earth?? If you understood that issue you would know that scientists, mathematicians, philosophers were the ones to inform the the dummies, like you.. about their discoveries, this changed the view. The Church largely did not accept this. But there are many different non-euro beliefs about this which you can read here for the layperson.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

            HERE AGAIN IS WHERE YOU ARE STUPID>>>> Weather is NOT the same as CLIMATE.. Get that through your thick skull.

            And weathermen can predict several days very accurately, compared to say 30 or 40 years ago,, The science of meteorology has improved. But your head is stuck in the past, say 40 or 50 years ago.

            You are not intelligent and you lack the basic understanding needed to grasp even the simplest complex issues.

            AND YOU HAVE MISQUOTED>> AGAIN>>>> this is why you are a dummy>…

            “”Now, a high-ranking member of the U.N’s Intergovernmental Panel on
            Climate Change (IPCC) has admitted that climate policy has little to do
            with environmental protection”.”

            The quote was this>>>>>>>> “”One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate
            policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the
            environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the
            ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s
            Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of
            Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

            You should not misquote and you should understand what Edenhofer means. He is not saying that climate change is not occurring. He is referring to globalization and the distribution of wealth. But you climate deniers only love to cherry pick and misquote to support you ignorant beliefs and opinions.

            YOU ARE SO EASILY DEBUNKED. YOU MISQUOTE, YOU LACK BASIC UNDERSTANDING, YOU ARE UNQUALIFIED

            YOU ARE EASILY MISLED BY PROPAGANDA and most importantly… YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND SCIENCE !!

          • rochesternative

            I don’t know about the 10,000 scientists referred to in this article. As for qualifications, I don’t have any, I don’t claim to, but what I do have is COMMON SENSE. The planet, per science is millions of years old. A wide variety of life has been sustained on this planet, which if it’s orbit had been any other it would not have developed or survived. This to me, points to an intelligent creator, since I don’t believe the foolishness that we developed from swamp gasses and plants. Therefore, it goes to reason from that point, that if there was an intelligent creator, that creator in all likelihood has a plan. And an intelligent creator would also need no help from us. Therefore, I recycle. I conserve where I can, but I am not going to sweat in summer or freeze in winter, or walk/bike to work to protect the planet, when the planet has SHOWN it is capable of taking care of it’s self. It’s nature. Nature balances itself. As I said to Ena elsewhere in this thread, feel free to go all Fred Flintstone if you like, but don’t legislate my behavior.

          • Lee

            So when you are qualified you can debate me on scientific issues. Until then you are just a stupid conspiracy theorist with none to limited understanding of scientific principles. Put your keyboard down and slowly step away from the computer.

            Or if you were really genuine in understanding these issues, you could easily sit and listen to those more experienced and also question these rubbish articles. It seems people put these articles out for sheeple like you for their propaganda.

          • Lee

            This is from the first paragraph in the National Gepographiuc Article..

            “For tens of millions of years, Earth’s oceans have maintained a
            relatively stable acidity level. It’s within this steady environment
            that the rich and varied web of life in today’s seas has arisen and
            flourished. But research shows that this ancient balance is being undone
            by a recent and rapid drop in surface pH that could have devastating
            global consequences.”

            “The oceans currently absorb about a third of human-created CO2
            emissions, roughly 22 million tons a day. Projections based on these
            numbers show that by the end of this century, continued emissions could
            reduce ocean pH by another 0.5 units. Shell-forming animals including
            corals, oysters, shrimp, lobster, many planktonic organisms, and even
            some fish species could be gravely affected.

            Equally worrisome is the fact that as the oceans continue to absorb
            more CO2, their capacity as a carbon storehouse could diminish. That
            means more of the carbon dioxide we emit will remain in the atmosphere,
            further aggravating global climate change.

            Scientific awareness of ocean acidification is relatively recent, and
            researchers are just beginning to study its effects on marine
            ecosystems. But all signs indicate that unless humans are able to
            control and eventually eliminate our fossil fuel emissions, ocean
            organisms will find themselves under increasing pressure to adapt to
            their habitat’s changing chemistry or perish.

            READ CAREFULLY….. http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/explore/pristine-seas/critical-issues-ocean-acidification/

          • Joanie Dornak Wharff

            Just a bunch of Naysayers!…&, I’m NOT being taken in!… I’ll keep my money for things that are truly important! Than you very much! If you’re so gullible…go for it! They’ll be glad to divest you of your funds! LOLOLOL….laughing ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK !!!!!$$$!!!!!

          • Lee

            You need to understand “rate of change” , yes animals and plants can adapt but only over very very long time frames, millennia and more. The recent changes are occurring too quickly for adaptation to occur for most species.

          • Steven Paul

            STFU you liberal communist

          • Jonathan T Newsom

            Oops! We boast of lots education and blew it with junk.

          • Lee

            Good job

          • sammy

            Good job? You convinced no one!! You just cheered on a parrot.

          • Bill Erickson

            lol

          • Ira Altman
          • Gregg Macklin

            Wow, and you call others ignorant. IF the CO2 is that bad, then why no global boom in plant life? My pond should be covered in plant material, so should the seas and lakes and rivers.

          • Samuel Clemons

            Dr. Reid Bryson disagrees with you.

          • trump blast

            Just having a PhD does not an expert make !!! And studying under one does not make you anything but pregnant !!!

          • Okie Girl

            It is NOT science! Then you tell me how a volcano spews more CO2 into the atmosphere than all of mankind’s activities combined, and we’re still here? ??? You have NOT STUDIED SCIENCE, YOU HAVE STUDIED PROPAGANDA.

          • Lee

            Volcanoes do not emit more than humans. Where do you get this from? It is a lie put out by the oil and gas industry.

            https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities

            http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2011/06/28/3255476.htm

            “A lot of climate sceptics claim that volcanoes emit more CO2 than
            humans do,” says Gerlach. “They never give any numbers, but the fact is
            you will never be able to find the volcanic gas scientist that will
            agree to that.”

          • Okie Girl

            Actually, you cannot prove it either way. Remember that the hoax you believe in takes up .0001% of the Earth’s atmosphere. The past two “Climate Change Summits,” both keynote speakers stated that “Climate Change has nothing to do with the environment, it is for the necessary redistribution of wealth.” You’re allowing yourself to be played and have turned into a useful idiot doing so. http://www.livescience.com/40451-volcanic-co2-levels-are-staggering.html

          • Lee

            I have just read the article for the volcanologist. He states the best figure for volcanoes is 600million tonnes, with a further 250million tonnes he thinks needs to be samples and added. So total according to the article you quoted is 850 million tonnes.

            If we take 2011, US Geological data, the state,

            “U.S. Geologic Survey scientist Terry Gerlach summarized five previous
            estimates of global volcanic carbon dioxide emission rates that had been
            published between 1991 and 1998. Those estimates incorporated studies
            reaching back to the 1970s, and they were based on a wide variety of
            measurements, such as direct sampling and satellite remote sensing. The
            global estimates fell within a range of about 0.3 ± 0.15 billion metric
            tons of carbon ” 300 to 150 million tonnes.. NOT billions

            And the calculation for human emissions is …… wait for it……. just over 30 BILLION tonnes per year..

            So thank you for your link, I read it and it confirms what other scientist say.

            Volcanoes, at our BEST measured and calculated number..LESS THAN 1 Billion tonnes per year CO2

            Humans emissions, MORE THAN 30 BILLION..

            Please understand difference between MILLION and BILLION.

            I hope this helps your understanding (Or lack thereof)

            Best Regards… Enjoy your day..

          • bpf53

            oh really tell us all the name the college & the years you attended? Want to make sure I don’t go there.. Remember reading articles in the early 70’s from experts who stated mass starvation & hundreds of feet of ice in NY by 2000…

          • rochesternative

            Where in NY are you? I am from Rochester. This winter was pretty mild…except for two major storms that shut everything down. Last winter was TERRIBLE. So, gee, the weather appears to be fluctuating. These nut cases haven’t lived long enough to observe how weather changes.

          • Lee

            Again, you are confusing weather and climate. You guys are really stupid

          • xtasea

            So, Miss Enema, plant a tree! They love CO2! And it’ll give you something to HIDE your behind behind!

          • Tom Egil Bakke

            Wow, when the scientists have iq below freezing point I can understand how they could make so many people believe their scam

          • sirgareth

            “Vast”

            I hit the word and stopped reading

          • destroyeroflibs

            Fuck you cunt. You were lied to and you’re too stupid to see it.

            IPCC scandal, cunt.

          • Okie Girl
          • pezcleo

            You know the current 400 part per million not even close to average 1400 parts per million Ice drilling show. Highest its ever been 8000 parts per million. Its trace gas. Scientist publishing on Co2 drought when it was at 270 parts per million. Since Co2 went and temp has been dropping since 1998, CO2 can’t be source of rising temps. This is called a failed hypothesis.

          • Sugarsail1

            You are projecting. You are appealing to the authority of “science” instead of doing actual science. I am scientist in both degree and career, not a poser like you that took an environmental studies class in close proximity to a PhD (LOL, big deal). You are correct at least that science is empirical, however it is also amoral and thus your value judgements and moralities implicitly contained within your beliefs are not scientific, such as the assumption the world is over populated. I doubt you or anyone is qualified to decide what the “right” number of humans are on the planet. Malthus cried overpopulation back in the 18th century and said the world could not sustain more than about a half-billion humans. Ehrlich wrote the famous “Population Bomb” in 1968 describing how there would be mass starvation in the 70s and 80s. People that understand science embrace skepticism (not dogma) and know science is not predictive (although a well-tested model can sometimes be utilized predicatively) but indeed empirical, amoral and falsifiable. Those with some historical perspective on how far back these sorts of apocalyptic predictions go and how often they’ve been wrong, are very inclined to doubt because they are NOT ignorant at all, they are, in fact, paying close attention to your very unscientific behavior.

          • Michelle L. MacLean

            Ena Kana Hmmm…. so why are you pretending you aren’t ignorant? I wonder if you have *ever* even bothered to read reports from those scientists who dispute global warming being caused by humans… I read a NASA report that claimed humans contributed LESS than 1% of it! If humans were truly contributing that much to global warming then why are “green” products NOT MANDATORY? Hell, why aren’t they, at the VERY LEAST, cheaper than other products so more people will use them?? Why is it that saving the planet is so damned expensive? Bamboo is such an excellent renewable product–it’s super cheap to grow and most varieties will grow in almost any climate–but if you want bamboo anything you pay out the arse for it. Green paint is significantly more expensive than the stuff that is supposedly so bad for the environment. Electric cars are only for the rich… Why is that? Because the global warming thing is a freaking money making scam.

          • Dash Riprock

            Wow, you’ve got it bad, better lay off the kool aid for awhile.

          • rochesternative

            personally I have never claimed to not be ignorant about things I am ignorant about. But here is what I DO know : In the nearly 50 years I have lived I have lived through “almost an ice age” “almost-gonna-die-’cause-USSR” “gonna drown ’cause global warming and oceans rising” and more that I am sure I have forgotten in my dotage. The earth has been around a long time. It is awfully arrogant to assume that PEOPLE are going to destroy the planet. Several years ago we were going to die because of overpopulation…and guess what, we are still here. And now, gonna die, global warming AND overpopulation…and guess what, we will still be here in another 30 years unless some moron commie decides to bomb us and we have to bomb them back. Get right with the creator of the universe, and don’t worry. It is all under control. Not your control. Not Al Gore’s control, but REAL control. And there is nothing you, or any other single person can do to change it.

          • Abdullah The Sheik of Tikrit

            You must be a homoqueer, us Muslims hate homoqueers.

          • Maximillian Tsane

            LOL!

          • Scientific Squirrel

            Let me know when you figure out that, when these two touch no one will actually care what the weather is like.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a43c45c2f912b6fe94f509d9c603d5140ad0365fee554521b00f0dd075e0b141.jpg

          • Jonathan T Newsom

            Should not call people fools. It places you danger of hell fire.

          • Ron

            Stop wasting my oxygen!

          • John A. Smith

            Thank you, Ena! Because of people like you the Clintons are now out of our lives and the Democrats lose even more! Keep it up!

          • Bill Erickson

            John, shame on you – don’t tell her.

          • Samuel Clemons

            We’re laughing at you. LOL

          • James

            When empiricism is based on doctored and manufactured data, as is true in this case, then the data ceases to be empirical and becomes a lie. When computer models do not match observations, YOU DON’T CHANGE YOUR MODELS!!!!!! That is nature telling you that YOUR MODELS ARE WRONG!!!! Good grief! Engineering, anyone?!

          • Okie Girl

            Ena, you are very much in the wrong. Science has proven that the earth is not warming. More CO2 is allowed into the atmosphere in ONE volcano eruption than ALL of mankind’s activity. Your ‘theory’ is completely model-based. If it were true, 1/2 the United States would be underwater by now. You have done ZERO scientific research, you’ve only been listening to those who are lying to you. Look up this term coined by Stalin (do you even know who he is?), and then look in the mirror. USEFUL IDIOT.

          • xtasea

            Such name calling from one who’s shortened her name from Enema to Ena. Clever!

          • Scott Schymick

            Temperatures are slowly rising, but nobody can prove, thus far, how much is caused by man or how much is caused by the sun, earth’s orbit, or other factors. So if it is man made, the world should have gone carbon neutral 20 years ago. So the debate isn’t about if man is causing the temps to rise or not; the debate is what should we do about it. According to the left, we ran out of time already.

          • Sgt K USMC

            What’s your PHD in BTW?

            Had you read the list of names on the petition you would have also seen the links to their peer reviewed research backing their claims.

            But reading is hard, so here is the direct link to the list of over 40,000 scientists that agree global warming is a hoax

            http://www.petitionproject.org/

          • destroyeroflibs

            Fuck you cunt.

          • Ormond Lai

            Ena…how did you become a believer of climate change? Please give me your credible sources for me to examine. Don’t give me sources from propaganda affiliates.

          • ImajWalker

            I think ‘assisted’ suicide is legal now.. maybe go request that for yourself Ena.
            The Researchers / thinkers are busy here discussing REAL issues and not fairy tales.
            You’re not invited!

          • athousandmonkeys

            Poor little leftard.

          • DLB

            Yeah, it’s our fault that there has been multiple ice ages. It’s our fault that areas of the world that used to be lush jungles are desert, and deserts become lush jungles. Dry land that ended up under water, or bodies of water that dried up. The earth runs in cycles, it tilts on a different axis which changes weather patterns and changes the landscape. During those massive changes world wide, we weren’t doing anything to the earth. We were nothing. But for some miraculous reason, now it’s our fault. The earth does her thing and we are just along for the ride and have to adapt.

          • William Wooten

            what the hell was that rant all about?

          • Paul W Hassler
          • Walter Lee Atterholt

            And your point is? Empiracle data doesn’t support the global warming banter. CO2 level and temperature do not correlate. And heaven forbid methane should be a problem when all we need to do is burn it as a natural fuel. Even temp analysis does not show anything other than normal patterns.

          • Buddy

            Understand projection; your calling others ignorant is your first hint!

          • Becky Aheren

            someone feels threatened, getting to you huh?

          • Drawer22

            Ena Kana – You’re really quite amusingly entertaining. Thank you!

            De Oppresso Liber

          • Tim Jensen

            Ena Kana, It is far from settled science. Sit down and read opposing views from time to time, like real scientists do. Nice likeness in your avatar.

          • wernerpd

            troll…

          • Snideley_whiplassche

            What comic books are ya reading ?

          • disqus_OHmFmcSfpb

            Ohhhhh… sounds like somebody hit a nerve. It’s a bitch when you find your “religion” is PROVED TO BE BULL SHIT. So sad

          • Thert

            We are all asking that of you right now. What another stupid comment Ena. You sound like a 5 year old arguing with their 7 year old sibling.

          • Troy W.

            WOW… I’m in awe of your Obvious level of intelligence Ena Kana…. clearly among THE HIGHEST LEVEL of ungenius could be approaching EVER!? Do you by chance have a web page or youtube channel I can unsubscribe to? It’s truly amazing to to share your posts… I mean people on your level DON’T NEED to offer any facts in support,,, You JUST KNOW HUH??? I’m sure you’ve already factored this in but many people seem to miss the huge extent to which the democraps use the “Fudged Numbers System” for their “GoTo” accounting system as we found out in at least a few agencies (The Pentagon & H.U.D) that had HUGE sums of missing, unaccounted for funds & unreported by O’Bamas people (Who illegally implemented the deceptive accounting!) & only discovered when Our new American Administration… Shortly after President Trumps people took control… Meaning we really aren’t sure exactly how bad O’Bama screwed this whole Country or what He left in place to try blaming on on President Trump because those in the corrupt circles Clinton & O’Bama run in WILL LIE ABOUT ANYTHING & EVERYTHING JUST TO MAKE A BUCK FOR THEMSELVES!!!
            ???

          • Rene Geib

            Ena Kana: You are full of insults but no facts. You would be better with your argument if you would debate rather than insult others. If you weren’t so full of yourself and having no idea to add to the conversation intelligently, you may be able to change people’s minds but treating them like you are above them and throwing insult after insult will get you now where. I feel bad that you do not know how to debate only open your mouth and confirm your ignorance.

          • Charles

            What an idiot I’ve heard people spout b******* but never on your level you’re a new kind of idiot

          • Kutter52

            You are the idiot dreamer. The global warming hoax is responsible for billions spent trying to limit the emission of co2, plant’s oxygen. If fact, give plants co2 and they give us oxygen. What a deal!

          • Tom Best

            How nasty. Disparaging others who are every bit as intelligent and informed as you seem to be… simply for their opinions. Empiricism isn’t the answer… love, grace and truth as embodied in the Person of Jesus Christ is!

          • PissedoffinAZ

            blah blah blah IGNORANT!

          • Johnpd

            Mollie posts great info, & you post childish, idiotic nonsense.
            Interesting contrast, don’t you think? Tosser.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            If you think that is “great information” let me send you to the post about how the [46 year record low] US unemployment is REALLY higher than during the Great Depression. You folks have a lot in common.

          • Johnpd

            Great info. Thanks, Mollie. 🙂

          • Ena Kana

            An excuse for depopulation??? Not everyone believes that Armagedddon is the proper solution to human overpopulation. ITS CALLED PLANNING YOU F****** NUMBS***.
            AN INTELLIGENT ORGANISM PLANS, DUMBFU*** LIKE YOU GUYS PRAY AND HOPE FOR THE BEST!!! You are the devolution of Homo sapiens, but you can’t help it anymore than your parents couldn’t help but be dumb as **** too.

          • Mollie Norris

            Read Agenda 21 and Agenda 20/30 and Codex Alimentarius. Read research on the non-food GMO corn eugenicist Bill Gates is pushing to starve and poison people in developing nations. Butterfly scientist and racial eugenicist Paul Ehlich has lied about the effect of increasing population for over half a century. The standard of living has increased with population for hundreds of years. Ehrick’s lies are 180 degrees from the truth regarding population and resource scarcity. He lost one $25,000 bet that any one of his predictions would be realized, and turned down a second chance on the bet. Physicist Robert Dubrin has great info on the facts in “Merchants of Despair”. Enjoy your hate and lies and support for the Illuminati-Nazi Ahnererbe Death Cult. When you’ve sold your soul to satan you have nothing to lose, but the millions of us who know God outside of space and time will continue to pray for you. Unfortunately, DKE is incurable, though, but those of us with IQs > 99.99% of the population deal with it the same way we avoid stepping in dogsh*t.

          • anthony divjak

            And thats why are we still seeing the Ctrails being dumped over BC Canada, daily!!!!!!
            it is on the end of the day that those huge aircraft return to the stateside in WA. it is interrestig to see them not having any trails behind them on the home trip……….

          • Mollie Norris

            We’re allowed to inhale the poisons here in Santa Barbara, but only “conspiracy theorists” are permitted to see the chemtrails. I can see both those white tankers and also commercial aircraft on the flight path north from LAX, and, as a pilot, have some ability to judge altitude (important, due to temp variation), and pretending chemtrails and contrails are similar is insanity – official denial of chemtrails has been as successful as the “fake news” psyop.

          • Ena Kana

            He did not lie about the dangers of population growth, but he did not foresee the increases in food productivity that would come to pass. However, he is correct that human population is the critical issue of biosphere health.
            BTW, anyone who talks about God, Satan, and death cults surely has no ability to reason clearly, and certainly near the bottom of the IQ pile.

          • Mollie Norris

            ” near the bottom of the IQ pile” – very superior/gifted range – possibly you have DKE. Paul Ehrich lied about the correlation between increased population and higher standard of living based on GDP, based on data posted by UC Berkeley Econ Professor J. Bradford DeLong and UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Ehrlich’s career as an entomologist studying one species of butterfly hasn’t included either the education or knowledge required to evaluate the impact of increased efficiency due to specialization, increased knowledge, infrastructure development or technology that’s characteristic of human populations. Your problems and Ehlich’s are based on the use of emotional decision-making processes to solve quantitative problems that require rational thinking.

          • Sugarsail1

            that’s the problem, is these expert predictors never have enough info to predict anything with any accuracy so why put faith in them and treat them as prophets of doom? That’s why many doubt..and it’s for darn good reason, so you should respect an listen to them, they might even know more than you.

            Anyone that thinks the sea levels will rise in an apocalyptic flood due to their sins of burning fossil fuels unless they repent by buying a Prius while demonizing those that disagree as heretics (deniers) surely does not recognize their own religious instincts are running amok and although they may be much more intelligent than one who talks about God and Satan, they grossly lack self-awareness which makes their intelligence wasted.

          • John A. Smith

            Ena, I’ve read some of your previous comments on other threads. Yep….you’re just a nasty, hate-filled piece of work. Life obviously sucks for you.

          • trump blast

            Those who deny the truth while supporting lies should avoid earthquake zones and supercell thunderstorms !!! Because they might get the truth slammed into their faces !!!

          • Sugarsail1

            Indeed but an intelligent organism plans intelligently, not hysterically based on apocalyptic projections.

          • John A. Smith

            Ena, besides very probably being factually wrong, and intellectually dumb for swallowing hook, line and sinker the one dubious side of an open argument, you’re really just a rotten, nasty, arrogant, hate-filled sad little person who presents an argument like the typical “progressive” that defines what you people have become in what is otherwise a civil society. Congratulations.

          • Bill Erickson

            ha ha such a pleasant person. And sharp as a tack that little Ena.

          • mrmars72

            Bullshit

          • Rick Johnson

            The one thing i love about that election is that George Bush’s home had a smaller “carbon footprint” than Gore’s. . Gore lived in an energy hog of a house and used “carbon Credits” in order to maintain his lifestyle.

          • Lonny Bubert

            It appears that Google removed it.

          • Mollie Norris

            Try Safari or Firefox. Google is useless.

          • Buddy

            “Global warming is an excuse for depopulation and global government” Yes, and the idiots supporting it don’t realize they’re the ones that will be taken out when the time comes.

            The elites have determined the unwashed masses are the problem; we need water, food, heat, and all of those things hurt mother earth according to the modern day Shamans, Seers, Witchdoctors, Soothsayers who at least gave their audience an exciting show, complete flash powder, human sacrifice, (oops, that’s coming), and some wild dancing and rattle shaking! We get John Kerry, Al Gore, and Obama?

          • Mollie Norris

            The most notable person to acknowledge this, I think, is James Lovelock, the chemist who popularized the Gaia hypothesis, and has since become an opponent of fossil fuel starvation. He’s an old, but still very smart man (I’m a chemist, and Lovelock is a REAL scientist), and has witnessed the hardships imposed on the poor and the elderly due to the increase in fossil fuel prices.
            The Cornwall Alliance, http://cornwallalliance.org/ is an organization of natural scientists,
            Christian theologians and economists who support biblical earth stewardship.
            The Illuminati (not the elite; illuminated by Lucifer, the Morning Star (who fell to earth), who “came up with the idea” of global warming and resource depletion (Club of Rome, “The First Global Revolution”, 1972, green-agenda.com) were racial eugenicists whose depopulation agenda was supported by the fiction of anthropogenic destruction of the environment. Club of Rome was founded by David Rockefeller, with its members, including 350.org founder Bill McKibben, chosen from the Committee of 300.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            No, dumbass, it’s all about SCIENCE.

            The NAZI would be TRUMP – by definition AND by his staff.

          • Mrmossyone

            You know nothing of fascism or the NAZI party. It certainly wouldn’t be Trump. Do you think you could post one thing of substance instead of constantly calling names. The petition with 31,000 scientist signatures has been around for several years and certainly isn’t fake. The preeminent climatologist on the planet from MIT says AGW is a money making scam and is disgusted by “scientists” who are towing the line to receive grant money. You are a flat earther.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            And you are a fool.

          • anthony divjak

            YOU got that right!!!!!

          • Ena Kana

            Do some simple research? DO SOME SIMPLE RESEARCH? How about YOU do some simple research!
            I’ve studied climate science at University! Where did you get your information??? CBN News??? Trinity Broadcasting???
            THE CLIMATE IS CHANGING VERY RAPIDLY WHILE YOU DUMBF***S SIT HERE AND GO ABOUT BELIEVING WHATEVER MAKES YOU FEEL GOOD.
            Well I’m sorry little minds but that’s not how the Universe works.
            The Universe operates upon factors of CAUSATION. What I’m wondering is what causes perfectly capable Homo sapiens to be incapable of processing reality. THATS WHAT I WANNA KNOW

          • Susan Perreira

            Some of us people have researched global warming, and completely disagree with it. We’ve formed an opinion that denies its existence.

          • Paulmatthew22

            Climate change is real. Global warming is CRAP

          • Susan Perreira

            I do not understand the difference between climate change and global warming. I thought they were one and the same.

            The left just changes the name from global warming to climate change when their cause wasn’t helped while the weather was cooling.

            The world is currently in a warming trend. I’ve heard this….I’ve not researched it.

          • anthony divjak

            I clear answer! thank you

          • Bos95

            The climate is always changing. A lot of scientists now believe that El Nino and La Nina are responsible for the changes to our climate. It is not man made. Unless you want to make Al Gore richer than he already is. He has already increased his wealth from $1 million in ten years to $100 million based on fraud.

          • Paulmatthew22

            Just let me know when the Ice Age is coming DIPSHYTE

          • rochesternative

            because there is no PROOF. Change in temperature from year to year is NORMAL…and I just got done have a huge global warming incident in my hometown that resulted in 26.7 inches of snow. So give me a break. And as for your “University” training….I too went to a University and studied education….and guess what…I learned all sorts of THEORY and BEST PRACTICE…and then I entered a classroom and I learned how things REALLY work. So just cause someone in a college or university TOLD you something does NOT mean it is true

          • Ena Kana

            Why don’t you do some simple research? Here, let me help you:
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide#In_Earth.27s_atmosphere

          • Corruption_Eruption

            Wikipedia is a terrible source for factual info as it can be written by anyone.

          • Sugarsail1

            I wish this was merely political..it’s sadly more psychological.

          • wbbuckelew

            It’s called redistribution of wealth. Follow the money.

        • zzz05

          Your (there’s been none for ~ 19 years) sound bite has been retired lately. You must have missed the Thought Leaders’ downloads.

          • Johnpd

            go to http://www.wattsupwiththat.com & put in search box: No Warming 18 Years 8 Months.
            Many great articles on this fine site. 29 million views?

          • zzz05

            In fact, the diagram slightly further down the page, https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/clip_image012.jpg
            refutes the whole “No Warming 18 Years 8 Months” thing, by showing that it’s just one exceptionally hot year 1998 on top of a constant slope. Truncating the graph before 1998 as he starts with https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/clip_image0021.jpg naturally obscures the fact that nothing has changed.
            Statisticians know well the lack of reality of any “trend” which requires that one end of it be fixed on a single unchangeable point, and common sense would agree.

          • Johnpd

            Your gibberish makes zero sense.
            The UAH graph shown for 444 months Dec’78 to Nov 2015 is NOT truncated at 1998, & as described in the article: “shows global warming at an unalarming rate of just 1.14 Deg C per century.”
            Now if you want to wet your bed over 1 Deg C over a century = 100 years, then I suggest you buy a potty.

          • zzz05

            So you have given up on the “No Warming 18 Years 8 Months.” you were talking about 3 days ago, and have now moved on to “unalarming rate of just 1.14 Deg C per century.”
            Slow progress.

          • Johnpd

            You are a retard. The two statements are not mutually excusive, shit for brains. We had warming 1910-1940, cooling 1940-1970s, when the newspapers were panicing about the coming ice age, then warming 1970s to 1998. There’s been no warming since, apart from completely natural El Nino events. which are natural volcanic activity warming the Pacific Ocean. You know nothing.

          • Ena Kana

            NO YOU ARE THE RETARD JOHNPD
            You want so badly to be right, but you have no idea HOW TO BE right.
            You need to begin with the facts that all scientists understand, BUT THAT IS NOT HOW YOU BEGAN–you began with the conspiracy theorists because YOU ARE A GAMBLER JOHNPD.
            You don’t want the easy win that comes from sticking with the experts.
            OH NO, JOHNPD GOES BIG.
            John wants to bet the HOUSE AND THE FARM on THE F***ING MINORITY REPORT in hopes of celebrating A HUGE UPSET.
            But this is not a f***ing ballgame Mr. Johnpd this is reality. Why don’t you look into it….

          • Ena Kana

            STOP THE PRESSES
            Attention world, JOHNPD announces El Nino is caused by underwater VOLCANIC ACTIVITY!!!!
            I can see the headlines now——
            “JOHNPD revolutionizes oceanographic and climate sciences with first telepathic scientific discovery”
            Oh wait, JOHNPD doesn’t know what TF he is talking about, disregard. Turns out someone commenting strongly on the subject of climate change has never taken a SINGLE weather & climate class IN HIS LIFE.

          • anthony divjak

            You are correct!!!! Also if it were really a warming trend Canada would become a food basket of the world, but sadly not!
            So stop blocking the sun and we might get to grow clean food without the filthy monsanto murderers influence….

          • Johnpd

            Well said. 🙂

          • Plinda Joblonski

            go to https://wottsupwiththat.com/ for the REAL story.

          • Johnpd

            wottsup? complete rubbish.

        • TheRuleOfLaw

          I might also add that one small burp from an active Volcano emits more CO2 than humans have in the history of mankind and more than humanity can or will for the next 10 million years. It seems that almost all scientists, including those who are paid to preach on climate change can agree on this fact.

          • Johnpd

            Precisely. I’ve read geology prof. Ian Plimer’s great book: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science.
            The attack on CO2, the basis of life, is aimed at de-industrialisation & depopulation.
            The profoundly anti-human “environmentalist” ( = Communist) agenda is well laid out in Robert Zubrin’s book: Merchants of Despair.
            Sub titles: Radical Environmentalists, Criminal Pseudo-Scientists, and the Fatal Cult of Antihumanism.
            This fine book reveals the current “environmentalist” movement is a continuation of Brit (Rothschild) Empire’s attempt at World Hegemony. The Malthusian & Darwinian philosophies at work are the same as led to the Empire caused famines in Ireland & India.
            Zubrin, a PhD nuclear engineer with 9 patents to his name or pending, also reveals how safe & clean nuclear energy is being suppressed.

          • Dano2

            “great”

            Best,

            D

          • anthony divjak

            Thank You! A voice of common sense you are!

        • Ena Kana

          “ANYONE WHO HAS DONE THEIR READING” Hey JOHNPD what the **** have you been reading???? The Bible?? The Koran??? Where do you get YOUR climate science education from??
          Let me guess — From news clips of famous people’s quotes????
          GUESS WHAT
          Science begins with OBSERVATION OF REALITY
          WHERE DO THE LESSER MINDS LIKE YOU BEGIN??
          HERE—->”LETS SEE, HOW DO I FEEEEEEEL ABOUT THIS???”
          Well guess what Homo sapiens you are a fu***** embarrassment to your species; There were Europeans who lived 150 years ago who understood the Universe better than you do, why don’t you go put on some TV and stay out of the intellectual debates because YOU’RE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF RIGHT

          • Johnpd

            Book: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science. Prof. Ian Plimer. 2300 refs to peer-reviewed papers.
            Book: The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science, by drtimball.com
            Book: Slaying the Sky Dragon.
            Book: Climate: The facts http://www.wattsupwiththat.com
            Read articles on http://www.climatedepot.com
            Educate yourself.

          • Ena Kana

            I’m at University and have been at University for years. Why don’t YOU go and get educated….

          • Johnpd

            You come across as a ranting angry & ignorant child.
            I’m 63, always reading, always educating myself.
            I’m sure as sh1te not dumb enough to fall for the climate scam, which was the first nonsense Trump squished. 🙂

          • TexasThespis

            “I’m at University and have been at University for years.”
            LOL. Can’t graduate, huh?

        • DreamGirlsDaily

          Anyone who has done their research knows that global warming, redubbed “climate change”, is a MASSIVE fraud, yet they’d also know that Buzz Aldrin is a stain on society, a liar and an astroNOT and part of the massive conspiracy in faking the Apollo moon landing. NASA is a joke as well.

        • The_White_Rabbit

          Even the densest Trumpanzee should be able to understand this graphic on man’s contribution to climate change.
          https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/

          • Johnpd

            MSM FAKE NEWS. Read the books I’ve ref’d.

          • The_White_Rabbit

            Data by actual scientific agencies not far right nuts.

          • Johnpd

            Ian Plimer’s Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science has refs to 2200 + peer-reviewed articles. drtimball.com is one of the world’s top climatologist, dummy.

          • The_White_Rabbit

            One with a bunch of fakers that mostly don’t even have college degrees. What who you call dummy, you POS!

          • Johnpd

            You’re an idiot. Go disappear down your rabbit hole, Dumbo.

          • The_White_Rabbit

            Another Trumpanzee that can’t handle data and science. Stay the **** out of my way asshole!

          • The_White_Rabbit

            Try it outside the keyboard PIGGIE!

          • The_White_Rabbit

            Next time watch your attitude, cause I don’t care who you are dumb ****.

            http://www.snopes.com/30000-scientists-reject-climate-change/

            The petition was created by individuals and groups with political motivations, was distributed using misleading tactics, is presented with almost no accountability regarding the authenticity of its signatures, and asks only that you have received an undergraduate degree in any science to sign.

        • David William Pomarnke

          No. Scientists agree that the planet is warming and will continue to do so, to the determent of all Earth’s inhabitants. Those who dispute this FACT are nothing but ignorant, mindless fools.

          • Johnpd

            There has been NO WARMING for ~ 20 years. Go to http://www.wattsupwiththat.com & put in search box: no warming
            RSS & UAH satellite datasets & radiosonde balloon datasets confirm this.

            It’s a huge con, a scam to hike energy taxes & much more.

            Anyone who is afraid of warmer times is an idiot. Warmer times are more prosperous: Medieval Warm Period, Roman, Minoan etc. All occurred well before man’s industrial production of CO2, plant food.

            For some FACTS read Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science by Prof Ian Plimer. Written in plain English, not for scientists, it contains over 2,000 ref’s to peer-reviewed papers etc, for those interested.

            Read also: The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science by Dr. Tim Ball.
            Shows how the IPCC is a corrupt political/bureaucratic body posing as a scientific one. drtimball.com

            John Doran.

          • The_White_Rabbit

            Try this nitwit.

            http://www.snopes.com/30000-scientists-reject-climate-change/

            The petition was created by individuals and groups with political motivations, was distributed using misleading tactics, is presented with almost no accountability regarding the authenticity of its signatures, and asks only that you have received an undergraduate degree in any science to sign.

          • The_White_Rabbit

            https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/did-global-warming-slow-down-in-the-2000s-or-not/
            Meanwhile, skeptics have seized on the mismatch to suggest that global warming stopped in 1998. Almost all scientists disagree with this. But there are questions about the rate of warming. Most recently, the NOAA study suggested that rising temperatures never even slowed.

          • The_White_Rabbit

            https://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/programs/oppa/climate_change_paper.pdf

            A significant amount of existing research indicates that the world’s climate is changing.
            Emergency managers should consider the implications of climate change regardless of the cause.
            Several climate change-related trends may present critical challenges to emergency managers
            and warrant in-depth analysis. These include:
            • Rising temperatures
            • Increased storm intensity and frequency
            • Rising sea levels
            • Changing drought and fire risk
            • Shifting threats to human health and disease patterns

      • Grog618

        DNA is science also, but liberals argue that when it comes to the transgender hooey! You’re right, “those who question science are in the REALLY DUMB CROWD.”

      • Roxene Kimes

        millennials have been indoctrinated to believe anything and they think anything the media tosses out there is “science”. When morality is gone gullibility is all that remains!

      • Pablo Nicolas Fernandez

        lol scientists can be bought too sweety, what is dumb is believing everything you are told without questioning it

      • Rebecca Rosenjack

        Yup and science says its a hoax. Science doesn’t lie

      • Steve Vise

        A true scientist ALWAYS “questions science”.

      • Jeff Nagengast

        Science is the scientific method. According to the scientific method, climate change is still at the hypothesis level. Their predictions have been incorrect time after time. It will never become a theory until it has repeatable predictions. But the predictions are almost always completely off base.

      • Bob McMahan

        Ena, take a gander at the ice age, when much of the US was covered by a thick sheet of ice. That was before people came around. Most of that ice eventually melted, without any intervention from people.

        • anthony divjak

          Very good and valid point, no university degree needed for logic!!!1

      • 999Greg

        The REALLY DUMB CROWD is made up of those who do not realize that Science is *always* questioning/ exploring/ hypothesizing/ testing/ evaluating/ revising.

        Anyone who claims “the science is settled” or anything like it is just plain bullheadedly wrong.

      • Pookie Bear

        Hm. I’m a doctor and I can run circles around and MD or DO who practices allopathic medicine, the same medicine science says is superior with their toxic drugs. Sit down and be quiet. The dumb person is you for believing the government who is in bed with science.

      • Karen Willet

        But this is about so called scientific results being questioned by scientists, so your comment is really, really dumb.

      • sam

        You act if no facts in science has ever been changed. A lot of scientific facts have been proven wrong.

        • Ena Kana

          I do not act I speak–listen to the WORDS. I know all about how science works. Just because science understands reality and you do not does not mean that you should stand against science, as if it is dominant male competing for your bitch. Science is the ONE system on earth designed to study reality and uncover what reality is all about. If you eschew science it is only because you were influenced by ignorant people whom you mistakenly looked up to. Think again.

      • Colin Spencer

        Ena, “climate change” as you put it, is not science, it is a belief system, based on ever changing hypothetical models. I say ever changing because, so far, none of them have had conclusions which have any remote parallel with historic reality. In fact, the earth may even be heading into a cooling period at present – an observation of a small number of climate scientists in recent times.

        • Ena Kana

          Climate science is not science? Perhaps you are confusing climate science with Christian science? Climate science is most definitely a science. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the scientific method of testing empirical data? Observing reality and designing hypothesis to explain phenomena? This at the heart of the meteorological and climatological sciences.
          These two sciences are based upon PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY.
          Your opinions, however, fit the definition of BELIEFS, unless you have some evidence that is stronger than an entire field of science? I didn’t think so….

          • anthony divjak

            What the hell are you talking about? Do you support the man made warming hoax? Enjoy breathing the Ctrails and the airborne toxins?

      • Kenneth Breitling

        Hey dummy, crap in, crap out is not science. What, of the science of “…the world is flat…”, still holds true? Peer review on a paper that refutes the math previously used is ongoing and those who have initially reviewed the paper prior to formal application have concurred that faulty math was used and assumptions were made that have no place in the determination of such long ranging predictions. I’ve spent way too much time digging to just give what I have found away. So I say “…look it up, it’s there…”

      • mattwm

        No science, just consensus.

      • Steve Koch

        Science is all about questioning!

      • Mrmossyone

        Eva are you kidding? The whole point of science is to question science. Any person who says the science is settled certainly isn’t a scientist.

      • Paulmatthew22

        It’s called pseudo-science Ena ,,You have been duped ,.PLease tell me you don’t believe EVERYTHING you have been told?,.I knew an Ena once,.She was really stupid ,..Maybe it’s just a name thing?

      • Johnny Teel

        Science is about questioning it. That’s how it works. I only takes one to prove a theory, hypotenuse or law wrong. Consensus is not science and science is not consensus.

      • Sugarsail1

        science is empirical not predictive….you are attributing the qualities of a prophet to science and then appealing to it dogmatically as an authority…you are behaving religiously.

      • Sugarsail1

        As far as being in the “dumb” crowd of questioning, you should maybe listen to Oppenheimer in his Life magazine interview way back when, he may have known something about science: “There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry.
        There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free
        to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to
        correct any errors.”

        Looks like those that behave dogmatically and demonize those that doubt are the ones who are unscientific and in the REALLY DUMB CROWD.

      • rochesternative

        faux science…sure

      • rochesternative

        “Those that question science?” I’m sorry, but you do know that is how hypothesis are proven true or untrue right? I suppose you don’t question the big bang either since that is “science” (quick….when was the last time an EXPLOSION CREATED something other than a big hole) Give me a break. I’m not a scientist, I did not do especially well in science classes either, but my reading comprehension and reasoning are pretty good, and you need to work on both.

      • Grace

        Those who DON’T question science are in the REALLY DUMB CROWD. Hey, Obama says its settled so god has spoken.

      • Whitey

        You have a truckload of unproven statements, straw men, tautologies, ad hominem and a statement that is perhaps, and I am above calling someone stupid or moronic, the most unscientific statement I have ever read. Please don’t tell me you’re allowed to work with scissors or knives.

      • Whitey

        AGW proponents (I assume you are one) believe a number of things:
        – Atmospheric saturation of the atmosphere with “green house” gases and especially carbon dioxide, is the major, and some believe only cause of global warming, and now climate change
        – 97 percent of all scientists are in agreement with AGW
        – the reason it hasn’t warmed since 1998 is the fact the extra heating is sunk in the depths of the oceans by some unexplained mechanism
        – The Glaciers, Ice Packs and all ice, in fact, will melt by 2015
        – Al Gore predicted the Seychelles would be under water by 2012. They are not and doing fine with tourism based upon “Come see us before we sink!”. One of the biggest advocates for anti-AGW investment is the president of the Seychelles. good for bigness.
        – That’s enough and if there is anything you would like to logically discuss about any of these points, feel free.

        In conclusion, since AGW is settled science, according to the last sorta warm body that kept the lights on at The White House, if the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rises by 1%, by how many degrees will the temperature rise?

        If AGW is a settled science, as you say, it must be able to answer this. And so should you.

      • Anonymous Me

        Even the 30,000 scientist who disagree? Recently a scientist at NASA admitted they changed the data. Fake science, fake news, hired protesters, all brought to you by the Left.

      • tommygun722

        “climate change is science”

        Science is certain knowledge. It isn’t propaganda. It isn’t a bunch of government funded grant sucking idiots making up stories to scratch their masters backs.

        SCI’ENCE, noun [Latin scientia, from scio, to know.]1. In a general sense, knowledge, or certain knowledge; the comprehension or understanding of truth or facts by the mind.

      • John

        Learn some grammar and how to spell

        • rochesternative

          Don’t forget. Ena is practically perfect. After all he studied climate under a university PHD. Grammar and spelling are so last year!

      • Jonathan T Newsom

        You are right that climate change is science. But only a fool would NOT question science. Now I’m wondering who the “we all” are. By the way. Are you aware that there are lots of good people who happen to not be able to talk that you insulted here

      • timmeister54

        Then every scientist is in this really dumb crowd because the basis of science is to question and test science.

      • Kendall Lawyer

        (Sarcasm on) The climate changes . . . sane people call it “weather.” (sarcasm off)

        I have been following this story since the 1970s, when I was a kool aid swilling leftist. Back when I was in middle school and high school, the same people who are selling “climate change” today were preaching that the earth was headed into a new ice age. Not only that, but they swore, up and down, that there was going to be mass starvation and 100s of millions would die. The stories were everywhere. Time, Newsweek, the NYTimes, the Washington Post, the LA Times . . . everywhere. Take 10 minutes and google for 18 predictions from the first Earth Day.

        The thing is, every one of these folks were saying it was already too late to change and that the earth’s ice age and mass starvation could not be prevented. The only solution was to raise taxes and take wealth out of the USA and give it to 3rd world countries.

        When the ice age did not hit and the mass starvation and world-wide death from famine did not occur, the same people started their cry of man-made global warming (MMGW). Overnight, the looming extinction level event went from inevitable ice age to inevitable global warming. “The earth had a fever,” Al Gore screamed, we were burning up and the polar ice caps were going to melt and NYC would be underwater . . . Miami, too. Al Gore made millions from his movie, and 100s of millions when he sold his cable TV license to Al Jazeera. Funny, he really did not mind taking all of that $$ from the oil industry folks for his own pocket. The MMGW people insisted there would be famines and calamities around the world. The only solution was to create a “carbon tax” exchanges, raise taxes on Americans, take wealth out of the USA and give it to 3rd world countries.

        When 20 + years went by and the temperatures did not change and the British college temperature experts emails were revealed proving that MMGW was a hoax, the same people started crying “climate change.”

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/6636563/University-of-East-Anglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html

        Of course, the only solution was to raise taxes and take wealth out of the USA and give it to 3rd world countries.

        When leftists cannot keep their positions consistent and the solution to the coming ice, MMGW and “climate change” always comes back to raising taxes on Americans, to take wealth out of the USA and give it to 3rd world countries, one should be skeptical.

      • Joyce Lathrop

        LOL

      • Ryan Miller

        Hey Ena Kana… science by its nature is to be questioned. Anyone who says “…those who question science are in the really dumb crowd” does not know what science is all about. What you just mentioned is religion. Religion!

      • James

        Climate change is not science; it is a liberal agenda designed to gain more control over the masses. If you are so concerned with “scientific” methods then demand to know how this “98% of scientists agree” baloney came into being. If someone can come up with 98% of a number then what is the 100%?? Without knowing how many that is, ANY percentage is purely made up. And FYI, temperatures started rising BEFORE the rise of CO2 even registered anywhere. We have evidence all over the world of ancient cities that are now underwater due to changes in the coastline over time and all of a sudden we are being led to believe that the coasts MUST stay the same from this point forward or it is evidence that man is doing something terrible?? Please, we are not as stupid and gullible as you.

      • sad4us

        Climate change is science? Yeah, JUNK science! And of course the best way to silence opposing FACTS and opinions is to call people the REALLY DUMB CROWD.

        Be careful you don’t look in any mirrors after such idiotic name calling.

      • 1KR

        and those who believe this BS are also usually the idiots that think an unborn baby is part of the “woman’s body”, Talk about the DUMB CROWD

      • Steve V

        The earth has been in an almost continuous warming trend since the end of the last “mini ice age” about fourteen to ten thousand years ago. That was a very long time before the “industrial revolution” and the advent of man made greenhouse gasses in any significant quantity. Maybe the majority of scientists agree that “man” adds carbon to the environment, but they do not agree on how much difference it makes to the weather! The climate models being used are so inaccurate they don’t match actual results on even a five or ten year scale. To expect the disastrous weather conditions being predicted on a hundred year scale to be accurate is absurd. Thirty years ago, they were predicting another ice age! The worst part is, even if it were true there is nothing we can really do about it. The extreme measures being recommended by the government will most certainly cost billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars and all this money being invested is only expected to prevent a tiny fraction of one degree of temperature increase in a hundred years! Another negative aspect is: this entire boondoggle will all be paid for by Americans almost exclusively. The government is planning to implement costly and ineffective regulations here in the USA hoping to shame other nations into following suit. Rapidly developing nations like Brazil, China and India aren’t going to implement expensive pollution controls just because we do. If we do it unilaterally, they will take advantage of the situation by letting us pay for the cleanup while they enjoy cheaper energy for a while. This won’t be invested in heavily on a global scale unless other nations are convinced they have no other choice. Since this is a get rich scam for Climate Change promoters, they are never going to reach that conclusion. It is possible but unproven and anyone promoting climate change as a certain “catastrophe” is either a scammer or Chicken Little “the sky is falling”. Anyone that calls me a “Climate change denier” is a “climate scam promoter”!

      • destroyeroflibs

        And when scientific evidence to the contrary is presented, moreover when the so called science “proving” climate change is man made is debunked, all people like you can do is hurl insults.

        But what you NEVER do is challenge ANY of the evidence presented. Because you CANT!

        That’s because you are dishonest, disingenuous and deceitful.

        That puts you in the IGNORANT ASSHOLE SHEEP CROWD.

        Now piss off you ignorant slut.

      • proudcarrier

        And the dumbest are the ones who allow some other ‘scientists’ to tell them what to believe WITHOUT QUESTIONING . Science is always questioning what is true, and is the search for truth, not blindly believing what others claim is true.

      • athousandmonkeys

        Know who questions science the most, you piteous imbecile? Scientists do, because it’s their job to question science.

      • steve

        climate isn’t science it’s nature…..climate changes………….it always has, it always will…… nothing mankind can do or will do to stop it………….. those who believe in man causing global warming is drinking the kool-aid

      • Gaylen James

        You say that climate change is science, with which no one disagrees. Certainly, changes in temperature, daylight, tides, et c., can all be measured both qualitatively and quantitatively, in a scientific manner.
        But, what is the science for anthropogenic climate warming / change? No one has been able to establish a causal link between man and the climate. As far a carbon, all anthropogenic proponents ignore the natural exhaust of carbon and methane from animals, decay, sea warming and release from tundra. Compared to natural sources, man is responsible for probably less than 7% and certainly no more than 10% of the carbon exhausted into the atmosphere.
        Unless there is a magical measurement that can attribute all of the changes in atmospheric carbon levels to the exhaust by man, the change from 300 ppb to 500 ppb atmospheric carbon is primarily a natural phenomena. Simple observation of a change, without proportionate quantification of that change, is not science. For example, let’s say that you got into a swimming pool and the water level rose five (5) inches. Is it fair to say that you are responsible for the rise? Is it scientific to say that you were only one of a hundred people in the pool and not the sole cause of the rise? Obviously, no, that is not science. It is science to say that the rise is proportional to the volume displaced, but unless we take into account your volume and the volume of the other 99 people who got into the pool, the observation that the pool water level rose five inches when you got into the pool is not scientific, even though the observation has a basis in scientific principles.

        So, the challenge for the anthropogenic proponents is to show that the change in climate is due exclusively to man and not natural processes and orbits about the sun. And, this, the anthropogenic proponents have not and cannot do. That is the reason that anthropogenic proponents’ claims, just like the rise in the pool water level, are rejected by rational thinkers.

        Even the ‘greenhouse effect’ is an unproven hypothesis from the late nineteenth century (1800’s). Proposed at a time when scientific observation was impossible, today’s atmospheric observation disprove the greenhouse effect a temperature differential (or even carbon level) can be identified. That disproves a level at which heat is reflected back towards the earth as would be see in a true greenhouse. Again, the reason for anthropogenic proponents’ mystical term of greenhouse ‘effect’ – an effect when has no basis in truth.

        However, since you seen to feel that the science is proven, please provide the sources for your claim – but not things like the hockey stick or gross observations of atmospheric carbon and the number of people on earth. These are meaningless observations. Please give reproducible cause and effect reasons for anthropogenic climate change.

        Then, I’ll believe you.

      • csw

        yes Ena, climate change involves science, BUT, the same science can’t even predict the weather accurately one week ahead let alone years ahead……

      • Frank Castle

        OH ENA?? post proof of your claim… Your word doesn’t mean SCHIT…

      • Jeff Brown

        That’s an overly simplistic statement. There are many scientists in my family and I work with many of them at the university where I teach. In addition, as an instructor in logic and critical thinking, one must see that there is MUCH more going on here than meets the eye. Keep in mind that scientists don’t have a promotion channel, unless they fall in line with the left and the left controlled media therein. Therefore, if you agree with the money maker climate change, your “opinion” gets promoted. Interesting factoid is that since Al Gore embarked on his crusade, his wealth has grown from $2 million in 2001 to $100 million in 2016 – largely due to investments in fake “green tech” companies and the effective embezzlement of numerous grants and loans. There’s so much more I can say on this issue, but I’ll let Margaret Thatcher wrap it up for me: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/336cad713d18c6e6831990009c9e188c5f8da98d14cbc388f7b62836f48b5ad4.jpg

      • Buddy

        Yea, here’s a dummy now! Nobel Winner to Obama on Global Warming: ‘Mr. President, You’re Wrong’ – http://cnsnews.com/news/article/kathleen-brown/nobel-prize-winning-physicist-obama-dead-wrong-global-warming-0

        MIT Study: No Scientific Consensus On Global Warming Crop Impact – http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/08/mit-study-no-scientific-consensus-on-global-warming-crop-impact/#ixzz4DuuRw7s3

        MIT Scientist Declares Climate, Irrational, Based on Nonsense, Claims Ahead of UN Summit: http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/11/19/scientists-declare-un-climate-summit-goals-irrational-based-on-nonsense-leading-us-down-a-false-path/

        MIT Climate Scientist: Global Warming Believers A “CULT”: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/01/21/mit-climate-scientist-global-warming-believers-a-cult/

      • Michael Perkins

        Ena you are so dumb with such a hollow statement, you obviously have never worked in research. Open your eyes and brain all the facts are there to be seen, you never read you will never know dumb dumb. Research what Global warmers said in 1994 in relation to CFC’s, it proves something clearly and not worthy of a comment, I rest my case.

      • bwbeeman

        Sorry, Ena. Current science shows that there is no link between CO2 global warming and catastrophic events. It also shows that extreme weather events have not been increasing for fifty to a hundred years depending on the study. This is the science of it. If you want to worship somebody’s talking points without understanding the science, that’s OK. Just understand that science itself is a changing category, and climate science has changed from the ultra-warming idea to something altogether different. If you don’t believe me, look at the NOAA data. It’s specific and verifiable.

      • Snideley_whiplassche

        Ena, climate change is NOT a science, it is an earthly condition that has survived due to changes related to many things since its creation. When it becomes a science, it becomes corrupted by the scientists who have an economic and political agenda by skewing numbers and conditions to favor their discourse. Quit drinking the kooky kool aid, and get a REAL life…..

      • doornazi

        YOU TELL ME HOW 1 TRILLION DOLLARS AND REDUCE THE HEAT

      • Vincent Gore

        It was ‘science’ for centuries that the earth was flat.

      • anthony46

        Most of the people (especially celebs and politicians) who believe in the so-called science of Climate Change also deny the science of biology. They can’t seem to grasp two simple scientific facts: 1. that human life begins at conception. 2. That there are only TWO sexes and they are male and female and any other so called gender are a creation of a misguided mind.

      • http://www.daryl-hunter.net/ Daryl L. Hunter

        Climate change is history not science 🙂

      • bev

        scientist is never settled…always evolving

      • Gaylynn Collins Schiller

        It isn’t science. That’s the point. If you do your research you will find out the truth. Just have to invest the time instead of letting people think for you

      • John Pastirchak

        Wong. Debating “Climate Change” no more makes it a science than eating a baloney sandwich turns people into baloney. Rest assured too that my frame of reference– baloney– was no Freudian slip.

      • Tom Best

        Climate change is, indeed, science. Minute changes do occur cyclically, but not measurably due to mankind. Al Gore is laughing all the way to the bank!

      • Rami Eskola

        And you have a private lounge in that DUMB CROWD you leading ignoramus.

    • Paula

      Amen to that and the sports players

    • Whitey

      He was an old Greek doctor.

    • rochesternative

      better yet, why aren’t they moving to a “developing country” to show them how it should be done…and then killing themselves so we can see how dedicated they are to saving the planet.

    • Jonathan T Newsom

      Celebrities are only celebrities. If you have enough money you too can buy one to spread any bs you wish. Note how their word is useless after the fact. How many left the country after they​ promised the world they would if Mr Trump became president.

    • proudcarrier

      My niece is a firm believer in Climate Change or Global Warming, the last time I talked to her. That said, I wonder why she moved to Miami and the last I heard she might be buying a house there. Maybe since we got past the time when Algore predicted that Miami would be flooding with the ocean flowing into the streets, she isn’t so worried.

    • Lonny Bubert

      If it is really that urgent, then why does India and China get a pass for several years? If the sky is falling why would we allow other nations to continue to pollute? The predictions have been off by a long shot and that relies on the models. Can’t help but think it is all off.

    • Buddy

      Houses located very close to the “rising waters” of the oceans! Yea, they’re worried!

    • Bruce Wayne

      Those idiots keep watering their lawns through the drought.

    • Justin Tyme

      Hypocrites? You’re being too kind. They are crooked globalist socialists looking to raise their standard of living on the backs of the middle class. They are the enemy of the people.

  • DJR96

    Climate change is happening. And it doesn’t matter how or why.

    The point is that we as humanity have invested heavily into our built environment in the earths environment of the last few centuries.
    We know that sea levels have been both higher and lower in history. But we do not want to give up what we have built, or have to build more structures at massive expense to protect against sea level rises. So we need to do what ever we can to prevent changes where possible.

    • CAFM

      Climate change has always happened–for eons.

    • Johnpd

      We can build dams. Holland exists because of dams. No problemo.

  • Howard Brady

    Is it truly the hottest time in human existence? How then did the Vikings have cattle stamping around Greenland 800 years ago? How were Germans growing olives on the Rhine river 2000 years ago? And what were temperate oak forests doing in the middle of Norway and Sweden 8000 years ago? https://youtu.be/CTAsfUNDIv8

    • Ed O’Meara

      Germans never grew olives on the Rhine.

      • Johnpd

        Read Prof. Ian Plimer’s book: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science.

        • Matt in the Box

          Ian Primer lies to influence energy policy in his native Australia where he has financial interests in coal mining companies. He is one hell of a hypocrite after writing a previous book about creationists lying.

        • anthony divjak

          Youre corrrect John!!!!!

    • anthony divjak

      Aw, youre not suppose to say those things, they get in the way of *real* science hahahhahahahaha

  • Allen L Smith

    How are YOU going to take the 283 Million Sacred Cattle from India????? You can not whip ISIS , and you think the US will be able to depose of the Scared Cow, another scam in the works,

  • RustyBertrand
    • Morris

      Who owns the factcheck website. The Annenburg Foundation. ‘Nuff said.

      • Heretic2011

        She might as well have said Snopes or The Onion.

        • PissedoffinAZ

          Yes, they are the LEGITIMATE sites. Sorry you think they are liberal – a result of articles being debunked being mostly from RW lie sites such as this. Live with it.

          • VoicelessDidact

            No, they’re biased sites owned by the same international bankers set to make money from the carbon tax scam. Pull you head out of your ass.

          • PissedoffinAZ

            HAHAHAHA says the conspiracy whacko twit who is incapable of recognizing a fact. Save your breath. In my day, people like you knew your place – the lunatic fringe.

  • RustyBertrand

    The 30,000 Global Warming Petition Is Easily-Debunked Propaganda http://mediamatters.org/research/2006/02/14/700-club-anchor-touted-global-warming-skeptics/134878

    • pezcleo

      you cited to the propaganda site media matter…ROTFLMAO!!!!!!

      • RustyBertrand

        Plenty of links and good research in there, I checked all the links. A bit long though. Reading can be hard.

  • Coolfunnyname

    Good lord… I see that scientific opinion and articles are confusing for you, but sure let’s trust the wall street journal article and one pair of german scientists who published a survey and commented that models are difficult to get 100% accurate. It’s right to question the validity of research, but lets do it in a nonbiased way. What do you make of the actual evidence? Are millions of articles faking it for a few lols? Would NASA and all the meteorology agencies around the world corrupt data for … what reason? I’m sure al gore is smart enough to realise he could make a lot more money destroying the environment than trying to rescue it.

    Either way, I don’t think climate change will impact the election as much as you seem to suggest with the “before casting your vote” phrase. The issue is electing a pussy grabber with poor business management skills, a history of legal battles, 2 divorces under his belt and tiny hands, or a woman with poor business dealings and questionable use of technology.

    • Johnpd

      http://www.drtimball.com
      Read his book: The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science.

    • Dan Zorgel

      Many of the climate models predicted utter catastrophe by now… the planet is changing all agreed… but not to the extent of the global warming fear mongers… it’s about control. Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring gas and the earth prospers from it. Plants grow bigger when there is an abundance of it. Do an experiment and put some plants in a terrarium and pump in extra CO2 and increased the atmospheric pressure and see what happens. The plants will grow humongous. Why? because they thrive on CO2.

  • Johnpd

    http://www.petitionproject.org
    31,000 + scientists, in USA alone, including 9,029 PhDs protest the warming/climate hoax. Click on Qualifications of Signers.

  • Ron

    Rhode Island was formed by glaciers moving back and forth across it, no more glaciers up there and man had nothing to do with it. The Everglades was formed when water levels were much higher, they receded and there they are. Man had nothing to do with it. Yes climate changes, man did not do it.

    • Matt in the Box

      Fine understanding of times scales there Ron.

      Arf, Arf. Even sealions applauded.

  • Beejaym

    Next time actually post some math and science if you’re going to make a scientific statement like this. If you actually do look at numbers instead of fudging them for opinion pieces that contain words like “likely” and reciting other op-ed pieces, the numbers over a 50,000+ year span paint a bleak picture that exponentially explodes within the past 50 years.

    But, because you can only do this once and never repeat the results, it’s all called a “theory” and then idiots like you jump all over this “theory” because you have no fucking clue how science actually works and think they pulled this theory out of their asses since they call it a “theory”.

    You people should be locked up and put away so the rest of humanity can save your sorry asses from yourselves.

  • Don P
  • Teresa Mulligan

    The manipulative money whores that are pushing the “climate change” agenda are the same political money whores that warned us the next ice age was starting in the 60s.

  • http://smu.gs/L1p7XU winston
  • Stormoak Lonewind
  • Susan Wilcix

    My friend says this article is a hoax! I can’t find it refuted on snopes.com but there are a ton of pro- global warming articles on there!

  • timallard

    Our global problem is like this, a full glacial cycle takes 100,000-years and CO2 varies 100-ppm, from 180-280-ppm, that’s textbook Pleistocene-Holocene history averages.

    During the 800k-year ice-core record the maximum CO2 was 305±5-ppm, 3 interglacials ago, ok, we passed that about 1916 and since then added 100-ppm … let that sink in for rate-of-change.

    That’s a “glacial cycle” in only 100-years and it’s all ABOVE the highest CO2 value reached in a million years, acidifying the oceans 10-times faster than an extinction event.
    [ ICES ASC 2013 Plenary Lecture; Dr Richard Feely, 9:10 into 1:01:08; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etFob9Wy45E ]

    We must exit the Steam Age for electrons, most grid power is for thermal end-uses 80%, not electricity 20%, so to switch will only take 5-years moving to solar-HVAC, maybe 2-months if it was a war but don’t tell.

  • Hallur Hallsson

    Any chance of getting those names? the 30.000 names? and their education? And maybe a link to all those studies?

    • pezcleo

      Actually it organized by name or by degree level. its here http://www.petitionproject.org/ In all fairness it kind of old.

      • Hallur Hallsson

        The link you gave me, it has some dude, with á PhD in physics að án example. That PhD wrote his name in á strangely different way than He did physics. Just saying, looks fake to me

      • Hallur Hallsson

        But í have yet to check the rest out, thank you for the link

      • Hallur Hallsson

        Well the list ís not organized bý degree, as it happens. All í could see was a names list, sometimes with á degree behind.
        Then í looked at the summary of the peer reviewed data. That was not á lot.

      • Hallur Hallsson

        And í just have to believe that site about how many scientist per degree have signed it.

        Looks shady

  • PatBryanTX2

    31,00 ‘scientists’, eh? I think that you are lying.

  • Dave

    I personally don’t have any wish to believe in climate change because any good that could of come from it has been turned into a money making machine by the powerful and rich. However, I do believe we each have an opportunity to make our planet a better place to live. Whether this is by clean energy such as solar, wind and water or just by how we go about our daily lives. This could be by making sure trash is dispensed properly, or maybe it can be by switching off a few unwarranted lights or maybe as simple as planting an extra tree in your back yard. When we start appreciating what we have and working with the environment we will then start repairing some of the damage we have done.

    • Ziggy Eckardt

      Dave, there is nothing wrong with getting rid of pollution or saving energy. Taxing CO2 (a non-pollutant) in the Western world does not help much when the increase of pollution happens in the developing world. Switching to solar and wind is not going to happen. It does not replace oil and is only doable with heavy subsidies. “Green” policies have lost Ontario 300,000 manufacturing jobs. At what benefit?…

  • SeeBee78

    Lol. Well look at the ads and articles linked from this page. Yup looks like the top of the top news sources for the class of Americans who think climate change is a hoax, christians are persecuted in america, jesus rose from the dead, and the universe was magically created thousands of years ago by big sky daddy. Heck, lets throw aliens and chem trails in there too. Maybe even some 911 truthering. Lol. Morons.

    • SeeBee78

      Haha, why not go all out and say Trump should be prez, the election is rigged (f he loses), and killary is the devil…

  • Mario Veras

    The only hoax I see here is this satirical article.

    • Little Man Tate

      This is not “satire”, you mouthbreather. There is no comedic bent, no hyperbole or exaggeration of a real viewpoint, value or behavior, none of the distinguishing hallmarks of satire. This is face-value misinformation catering to the ignorant, and you’d be well served to learn the difference.

  • Rebecca Morley
  • Marilyn Rubin

    Yes, 2014 was touted as being “the hottest ever” in the Earth’s history because of climate change. The petition and the documents included were all made to look like official papers from the prestigious National Academy of Science. They weren’t, and this attempt to mislead has been well-documented.

  • Guenther

    Almost all quotations and facts in the above pamphlet are false. I.E,. Hans von Storch is vivid warner of climate change : ” Based on the scientific evidence, I am convinced that we are facing
    anthropogenic climate change brought about by the emission of greenhouse
    gases into the atmosphere” and he never made that mentioned survey!

    Dennis Bray isn’t even from Germany, but from Cambridge and a Biologist !! He never even mentioned climate change !!!

  • MadRabbits

    Oh how breathless the Socialists get about climate change…. First, let’s all agree that until private jets are outlawed, socialist are not serious about this, and it’s all about politics… As one Socialist stated, vote blue all the way down the ticket…. Well that’s self serving… Let’s also take the multi million dollar grants away, since only those who believe in the agenda will get them… Nothing makes a scientist believe like a ten million dollar grant…. We need to take the breathless idiots, who espouse knowledge, but truthfully just regurgitate socialist talking points out of the equation…. Finally, for the Socialists who really believe in this agenda, you get only one breathless prrdiction…. If you start out claming a coming ice age, then shift to uncontrollable global warming, then finally settle for just climate change, because you really don’t know what the hell you are talking about…. You are debunked, sit the hell down and shut up… Retired atmospheric control tech. USN, ret

    • Matt in the Box

      Ban private jets on environmental grounds. I’d vote for it.

  • sdredneck

    Liberals and democrats always lie to get what they want. It is a ploy right out of the Marx/Lenin playbook. B@#$^%#s.

  • Grog618

    Climate change is NOT a hoax! The climate recently changed from summer to fall and next month it will change again to winter, to be followed by spring and then summer!

    • Ziggy Eckardt

      …and to make it even more confusing, the southern hemisphere is 2 seasons behind… er, Maybe 2 seasons ahead?…

  • Grog618

    Why is it that when it comes to this climate change garbage, liberals say the science supports what they claim to be the truth; yet when it comes to transgender garbage, they argue the truth of the science of the DNA.

  • Ed O’Meara

    The motive that “Al Gore and cronies continue getting richer from the global warming hoax” is absolutely absurd. Even ignoring any scientist worth their salt and the fact that climate change is happening and observable, there is just zero reason why powerful interests would advise moving away from fossil fuels.

  • Ed O’Meara

    Even this article can’t back up its claims. It says that the White House lies about how overwhelmingly convinced scientists are about man made climate change. Then they add:

    “A 2008 survey by two German scientists, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, found that a significant number of scientists were skeptical of the ability of existing global climate models to accurately predict global temperatures, precipitation, sea-level changes, or extreme weather events even over a decade; they were far more skeptical as the time horizon increased.”

    Which isn’t evidence. This just says that 8 YEARS AGO there was disagreement in climate models. Well, no shit.

    The motive that “Al Gore and cronies continue getting richer from the global warming hoax” is absolutely absurd. Even ignoring any scientist worth their salt and the fact that climate change is happening and observable, there is just zero reason why powerful interests would advise moving away from fossil fuels.

    This isn’t journalism. This stuff would make a high school blogger blush.

  • James McDowell

    From many years ago……..

    Famous weather scientist, Dr. Algore , formerly associated with A.S.S.H.O.L.E. (Algores Scatological Scientific Hagiographic Of Ludicrous Environmentalism) until it’s disbandment, and who was the creator of C.A.T.S.H.I.T. (Cap And Trade Scientific Hagiography & International Treatise) later found himself linked to the famous group, D.O.G.T.U.R.D. (Dumpers Of Global Temperature Unit’s Research Data),headquartered in East Anglia. That was one of a series of astounding efforts to preserve and increase tax payer supported financial backing and grants to the huge group of pseudo scientists, hell bent on redistributing the resources of the developed world and driving those countries into poverty.This of course while enriching their own bank accounts…………..We wish Dr. Algore a failure of effort, and hope that he and all the cru crew (cru-climate research unit) will be able to get the accommodations they so richly deserve, at the Mookatorium in Arbuckle, Virginia.

  • Billy S DuBose

    I think we are in a natural cycle! We just haven’t been keeping records for a hundred thousand years………long enough to realize it !

  • Roxene Kimes

    REALLY? ..making money is but a side bar. the real goal is MUCH more egregious than simply making money. Through indoctrination in the public schools they have dumbed down several generations that believe anything the media pumps out there and the goal is control through intimidation and fear, a control that will be used to put the UN in control and remove the United States and its constitution and freedom. We are on target for the New World Order and climate change is just one of many ways to garner the fear necessary to take the control needed to ratchet up the gullibility.

    • Well informed

      Your thoughts on indoctrination of millennials in public school is fascinating. Being a millennial myself, I wonder why you believe we are a dumbed down generation of non-thinkers?

      I dont personally believe a fucking thing I hear on the news. Doesnt matter if its CNN or Fox News. I’ve learned to think like this due to a little thing called the internet. A wonderful place where I can access unbiased information and fact check it at other sources along the way. It’s been very helpful as a bullshit detector. Many of us “dumbed down” millennials are doing this. We’re smarter and more informed than your generation. So kindly shut the fuck up, and stop making assumptions about us.

      As far as Climate Change goes…What harm comes to you if we change to renewable energy sources? You seem to care a great deal that a few rich and powerful people get to line their pockets, but you neglect to mention all of the fossil fuel tycoons who are currently lining their pockets while pumping pollution and death back into world. Have you seen Beijing? Do you want our cities to be like that? Do you want your children and your grandchildren to have to wear masks when they go outside? What happens when the droughts and flooding get worse?

      You’re a fool. You think we’re all drinking the kool-aid, falling for a big scam, but it’s really you and YOUR generation that’s gullible and selfish. I’m sorry that you fear change, but I’d very much like for my grandkids and their kids and so on to actually have a future on this planet. Fuck you for being part of the problem.

      • Ziggy Eckardt

        You have looked at Beijing and concluded that we must introduce a carbon (CO2) tax? I know a lot of smart young people. You are not one of them.

      • Morris

        The internet has multiple times MORE biased info than unbiased. How do YOU know what is biased and what isn’t? Crystal ball? Nope, your super sized ego of your mental superiority, it appears. Gawd, I bet your fun at a party as you gather folks around you and spout yopur deep understanding of….well, everything.

    • Johnpd

      Correct. Research UN Agenda 21, & read William Guy Carr’s book, Pawns in the Game.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEYpjgpg3X4

    • anthony divjak

      Absolutely correct! Its about our financing our own demise in form of depopulation as per UN agenda 21!

  • http://www.politickles.com/blog F.R. Duplantier

    Fraudster the Snowman

    by F.R. Duplantier

    Fraudster the Snowman
    Was an enterprising pol,
    With a trust-fund life
    And an upturned nose
    And a heart made out of coal.

    Fraudster the Snowman
    Was a senator, they say.
    He was made of snow,
    But the voters know
    How he came to life one day.

    There must have been some magic in
    Those tight blue jeans they found,
    For when they placed them on his legs
    He began to dance around.

    O, Fraudster the Snowman
    Found a way to live for free.
    While the people pay,
    He could laugh and play
    And drive around in an SUV.

    Huffedy humbug,
    Huffedy humbug,
    Look at Fraudster go.
    Huffedy humbug,
    Huffedy humbug,
    O the bilge of snow!

    Fraudster the Snowman
    Knew the sun was hot some days,
    So he said, “I’ll hoax
    All the stupid folks
    And get myself a big pay raise.”

    Down to the village,
    With a hockey stick in hand
    And some bogus graphs
    And some doctored stats,
    Showing crisis for the land.

    He led them to his Waterloo,
    Where the facts came out at last,
    But he never once admitted that
    He was just plain full of crap.

    For Fraudster the Snowman
    Liked to always have his way,
    So he waved goodbye
    Saying, “Don’t deny,
    I’ll be back again some day.”

    Huffedy humbug,
    Huffedy humbug,
    Look at Fraudster go.
    Huffedy humbug,
    Huffedy humbug,
    O the bilge of snow!

  • JohnnyAdams8

    Load a horse shit! If you believe in evelution then why try to change evelotion its part of it! Thats why there are polar bears there at all and not in antartic becaose at some point it got warm enough for polar nears to be there, idiots!

  • JohnnyAdams8

    Why are they trying to stop evolution

  • Box1Car

    REAL
    HOAX is idea we can do anything to stop it> Max Planck Institute for
    Solar Research has found TIPPING POINT reached in 1980 where Earth avg
    temp continues upward despite a drop in solar output> PERMAFROST has
    melted to a point where Artic & Siberian Tundra Bio-Mass has melted
    to release more CO2 & Methane gas than we could ever hope to
    corral> Too late now DUH

  • Morris

    Nine out of ten ‘scientists” are in the pocket of the government to pay for their existence. Who’s going to disagree under the threat of losing funding.

  • William Drumm Sr.

    We know people like Gore are full of, let’s just say that the world is full of people coning other people in many different ways. Just look at the Democrat’s in this year’s election. There all full of **it.

  • ZinkDifferent

    http://www.snopes.com/30000-scientists-reject-climate-change/

    Fake and misleading article. Of course.

  • Peter

    Utter rubbish! Even Coleman’s Weather Chanel says otherwise Climate Change is real. https://weather.com/science/environment/news/global-warming-weather-channel-position-statement-20141029

    • pezcleo

      They fired anyone who did not support that position. Meteorologist where polled on this it was 60% did not support it.

  • John Gabriel

    …And when did Al Gore become qualified and an expert on such matters? Just another Useful Idiot among the rest of the “left wing” knuckleheads.

  • http://www.streelnieks.lv Ukko Järvi

    What a load of bullcrap

  • Stephen Lococo

    this is a bullshit article. the elite wish it was a hoax. fucking mouthpiece douchebags

  • Corndog

    Man-made-Smog YES…..Man-made-Climate Change NO!!!

    However, our climate has and will always change…it is up to us to ADAPT and OVERCOME however the climate changes!!!

  • Concerned

    You know where you see the pictures above and you click them to see what they are talking about??? They don’t even mention the one with the picture. To me this is false advertising.
    For along time people have said the demos are lying about global warming. It is not that it maybe false so much as it is not caused by people, it is not their fault and we cannot do anything about it. These people are lying to you.

  • John Delaney

    Anyone who denies Climate change is a freaking moron. 30,000 scientists? BS! Anyone with the intelligence to do even a modicum of research can quickly confirm for themselves the climactic data for the past 100 years and SEE the warming trend.

    Now,this is NOT primarily man made but it IS changing.

    Please define WHO is supposedly making money on this?

    I am a qulified, certified meteorologist and MY research shows an increase in annual temperatures for the last 100 years. If you want to do a detailed study start with records beginning in 1800 and trend forward to 2000. IF you cannot see the difference..then you messers madams are lame of brain.

  • Mira

    This is CRAP. I hope your site will be on the liste with fake news circulating everywhere…CRAP. ( not even holy, just crap)

  • Elmer P Thudpucker

    Science is never settled, that’s the beauty of science. It’s all hypothesis, simple as that. Now when research scientists say “hold on a minute” They lose their grants and other funding. Pretty strong argument to agree with climate change if you want to continue research.

    • zzz05

      So you have a lot of experience with applying for grants, what works, what doesn’t, do you?

  • David A Riewe

    Bullshit news site
    WHAT’S TRUE: A petition that has been in circulation since 1998 claims to bear the name of more than 30,000 signatures from scientists who reject the concept of anthropogenic global warming.

    WHAT’S FALSE: The petition was created by individuals and groups with political motivations, was distributed using misleading tactics, is presented with almost no accountability regarding the authenticity of its signatures, and asks only that you have received an undergraduate degree in any science to sign.

    Aside from the potential political motivations behind the petition, the misleading tactics employed to gather signatures, and the lack of verification regarding those signatures, the fact remains that the petition is open to anyone with an undergraduate background in science to sign, and a vast majority of the signatories are not climate scientists.

  • Johnpd

    http://www.c3headlines.com

    Click on Quotes to find the agendas of the Communist idiots & Bankster 1%s pushing the warming/climate fraud.
    They want a one world totalitarian govt & a vast depopulation.
    John Doran.

  • Joe

    There is a lot of different information to take into account when looking into global warming. Average temperatures, average CO2 levels, Population, energy consumption are all things to take into consideration. By looking at the links I provide and cross referencing the information you see a correlation between human activity and the average temperature of earth increasing. The first link (http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/) shows average CO2 levels, the second (https://ourfiniteworld.com/2012/03/12/world-energy-consumption-since-1820-in-charts/) shows energy consumption, population as well as many other things, and the third (http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap15/global_temp.html) shows average temperatures. Cross referencing this information with each other as well as world events that happened throughout the time periods of the graphs it clearly shows that humans have had an affect on temperature and cause or speed up the process of global warming.

  • quita

    Climate change is real people whether we want to believe it or not. I am currently taking an Environmental course and I have found out so many interesting things about climate change. One thing I have learned the Earth is not only changing but so is oxygen levels it has increased from an estimated 2-3 per cent in the Cambrian to 21 per cent today. Also we are breathing in about 1 kilogram of CO2 each day. In addition to that you have to sit back and ask yourself why are states that are typically cold receiving warmer weather? Why is sea-level continuing to rise? How are we having more natural disasters than we have had in the past? it all circles back to climate change you can be in denial but if you closely observe the environment that you live in you will see that climate change is real and it is not just a hoax. It is happening everyday it may not be happening as fast as some scientist claim but it is happening and it is up to us to help stop it.

  • This guy

    Why is everyone so HEATED over this?
    Also how come this page has no evidence. It just says a bunch of people discovered climate change isn’t real. Then goes on to insulting Al Gore and friends

  • zzz05

    I think most of the What Me Warming? posters here are staggering also.

  • Colin Spencer

    Questioning the beliefs of those who are convinced that emissions resulting from human activity are changing the climate results in some unpleasant responses. Even in Australia, where a vast continent is almost uninhabited by comparison with those of the northern hemisphere, people are convinced that the climate is affected by their activity. No scientist worth his salt would say Australia’s emissions would change the climate, one way or another. Not with data, that’s for sure. However, regardless of the irrational beliefs of warmists, the more rational people have the intellect to reduce their energy consumption, and create ways to eliminate dangerous emissions. Not because they fear global warming, or because they think they can change the ever changing climate, but because they are innovators and actually doing something to improve our environment, rather than simply agitating – which is how those with only a belief system function.

  • Jay Manne

    Planet Earth is a living breathing organism that has endured for the 4.5 billion years of it’s existence. Our environment is affected by volcanoes, solar flares, shifts in tectonic plates and the moon. Changes were happening long before humans walked on this planet. And, to be more specific, humans didn’t really impact anything until the dawn of the industrial revolution in the late 19th Century. The premise many of these Climate Change folks believe is that if WE created Global Climate Change WE can fix it… that is insane.
    What angers me is that science declared in the 1970’s that we were going into an ice age…. then reversed fields and declared Global Warming in the 90’s… when their theories didn’t pan out as projected, they decided to move to a more generic Climate Change. Sure, the climate is changing, as it’s always been changing, but these scientists wish us to believe their theories based on a “consensus”. That’s pure garbage. Long ago, there was a consensus the universe revolved around the earth. And then there was a consensus that the earth was flat. Theories have to be PROVEN by data, and the consensus doesn’t have the data. Now, they wish to tax industrial democracies to death to pay for it all. And finally, in the next 50 years, we will not be using Fossil fuels to run our cars, or heat our homes… The jig is up…. prove it, or lose it.

    • 9.8m/ss

      “science declared in the 1970’s that we were going into an ice age”
      No, science did not. That was a media stampede to a false story. All through the 1970s, there were few climate predictions in the professional (refereed) science journals. And they were about six to one for warming due to manmade greenhouse gases.
      “And then there was a consensus that the earth was flat.”
      That is a lie also. Educated people have known the size and shape of the earth for over 2000 years, long before the scientific method was developed. The Greeks, Persians, Chinese, and maybe the Mayans, all figured it out independently. There was a time, known as the Dark Ages, when educated people had to hide that knowledge from an authoritarian church-state that was teaching false science, to avoid being tortured to death.

  • weedpuller

    I’m surprised it’s not 300,000!
    The data is cherry-picked to a fare-thee well by the climate change fatalists.

  • 9.8m/ss

    The Oregon Petition was a fraud when it was introduced, with a fake National Academy of Sciences cover letter. It was still a fraud when they removed Homer Simpson and the other obvious joke names. And my former room mate’s cat is still on there. They think he has a PhD in physics.

    John Coleman has no training or expertise related to climate. He’s a television weather reader. His only innovation is the news-free “happy talk” local TV news format. The founders of the Weather Channel hired him as a celebrity front man to raise venture capital. They fired him as soon as they were up and running. Thirty years later, “founder of the Weather Channel” is still the only thing on his resume, and he’s working part time for the fossil fuel investors’ anti-science public relations network.

  • shannob

    I missed the link to the 30000 scientists

  • Plinda Joblonski

    I am no scientist, but I signed the petition. Anyone can. No one checks who you are, what credentials you have, nothing. In fact both Mickey Mouse, PhD and Donald Duck, PhD have.

  • ferebetv

    The Club of Rome, a Jesuit Order controlled entity, came up with the concept of human made climate change to further enslave the human race under their luciferian control.

  • sally
  • timallard

    Our global problem is like this, a full glacial cycle takes 100,000-years and CO2 varies 100-ppm, from 180-280-ppm, that’s textbook Pleistocene-Holocene history averages.

    During the 800k-year ice-core record the max CO2 was 305±5-ppm, that was 3 interglacials ago, ok, we passed that about 1916 and since then added 100-ppm …

    That’s a “glacial cycle” in 100-years not 100,000.

    And, it’s ABOVE the CO2 peak reached for the Pleistocene acidifying the oceans: “The rate of acidification is 10-times faster or more than anything we have seen for the past 50-million years and perhaps over the last 300-million years.”.

    ICES ASC 2013 Plenary Lecture by Dr Richard Feely, 9:10 into 1:01:08; 14:30 in CO2 vertical maps; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etFob9Wy45E

    We must exit the Steam Age for electrons, most grid power is for thermal end-use 80%, not electricity 20%, so to switch will only take 5-years moving to solar-HVAC, maybe 2-months if it was a war, don’t tell.

    I like Dr. Hansen’s solution of a “carbon penalty fee” that takes the money FROM THE POLLUTERS and distributes it to all citizens equally, they spend it –>> the economy grows.

  • Kenneth Ho

    Just assume that climate change is a hoax, the planet isn’t warming up. Please tell me that what’s going to happen to humans and other animals if CO2 level keep rise at the current rate? Cutting emission isn’t just for climate sake, it’s for our own sake even if climate change is a hoax, which in fact it is not!

  • OG Mally Bieber

    The Global Change agenda is driven by a desire to have more industrialized countries “pay” less industrialized nations a sort of “reparations” due to their lag in taking advantage of economic opportunity. The idea that “we owe them” is what is important in their frame of thought. Global Warmists desire us to “admit our fault” – and pay off. This is just an extension of the liberal / leftist idea that it’s just coincidence that the western economies “won” in the last 400 years, and that winners somehow owe the losers. It didn’t used to be this way. It pays to be the winner. That is a truth that transcends everything. And if they can convince us to stand this on its head – then they have exerted a power. Don’t give it to them. It is a reversal of many, many generations of struggle that will be ceded by a demand. Screw their demand. Your ancestors paid a dear price to win – and it would be a dire shame to give up what they’ve left us simply because someone cried about it.

  • OG Mally Bieber

    Remember in the Hunger Games this line where the game master says “Everyone loves an underdog” – then president Snow says “I don’t – and neither would you if you met them”. See – I’m a lot like that guy. I don’t have a “soft spot” in my heart for the underdog – or the losers of history. I don’t crave a sense of “balance”. No – there are winners and losers – and it’s much, much better to be (even by happenstance) to be on the winning side. I feel no shame whatsoever. Go away Obama…

  • mattwm

    Liberals hate the truth, and this article puts forth the truth that is being buried by the left. The global warming farce has gone on long enough, and until they can PROVE something, they should keep their mouths shut.

  • http://strawn-04.blogspot.com/ Kenny Strawn

    I find it rather amusing that those who accuse anyone who doesn’t accept consensus as absolute truth of being of the “really dumb crowd” are the same people who go on to use tactics like CAPS LOCK and profanity that are themselves evidence not only of idiocy but also of gangsterism on the behalf of those who use them. If the left truly cared about intelligence as they claim to, then they wouldn’t be deliberately trying to make themselves look like street thugs when they argue on the Internet.

  • Jason
  • PursueJustice

    Follow the money.

  • Sugarsail1

    The religious attributes of the climate doomsayer’s behavior suggests they have been heavily biased by innate religious instincts (yes we all have them). The apocalyptic flood…that is, sea levels will rise due to mankind’s sin unless we repent (build an ark, or drive a Prius) is a universal religious narrative not only contained in biblical tradition in the story of Noah, but also as the driving narrative of cults and other religious cosmologies in their own version of the myth. C.G. Jung called these innate instinctual patterns “archetypes” and are the building blocks of myth, lore, film, literature, dreams and even the delusions of the insane. We aren’t witnessing mere political shenanigans, we are witnessing the biggest apocalyptic cult the world has ever seen. Discussions held only in the physical sciences cannot resolve this anymore than arguing about biology with a Christian about Christ’s resurrection from the dead is going to convince them otherwise.

  • Kai Poynting

    If this was real, it would have supporting evidence. NOT circular reports citing other bogus news articles. Primary evidence. A survey of scientists, a list of the 9 thousand ‘scientists’ with PHDs that we could cross-reference to see how many actually support this anti-climate change message.

  • John L. Battey

    There are too many other scientists and way too many pseudo-scientists getting rich on Big Al’s Gravy Train for it to go away anytime soon.

  • Frank Staron

    if I said humans will grow another toe in 100 years – how could it be disputed? as long as so-called GW is years away – there is no way it can be definitively proven correct

  • jack

    Economic Systems: The
    alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all
    about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true.
    A United Nations official has now confirmed this.
    At
    a news conference Feb 10 2015 in Brussels, Christiana Figueres,
    executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change,
    admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the
    world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
    “This
    is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting
    ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to
    change the economic development model that has been reigning for at
    least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.
    Referring
    to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at
    the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This
    is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which
    is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the
    first time in human history.”
    The only economic model in the last 150 years that has ever worked at
    all is capitalism. The evidence is prima facie: From a feudal order
    that lasted a thousand years, produced zero growth and kept workdays
    long and lifespans short, the countries that have embraced free-market
    capitalism have enjoyed a system in which output has increased 70-fold,
    work days have been halved and lifespans doubled.
    Figueres
    is perhaps the perfect person for the job of transforming “the economic
    development model” because she’s really never seen it work. “If you
    look at Ms. Figueres’ Wikipedia page,” notes Cato economist Dan
    Mitchell: Making the world look at their right hand while they choke
    developed economies with their left.

    Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021015-738779-climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism.htm#ixzz3UBxqTgeF
    Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

    .

  • Denise Garceau

    It is not real and the proponents know it too why else would they live in mansions, own huge cars, airplanes, sometimes more than one house. it is a bunch of BS .

  • chasrmartin

    Of all the sources I woudn’t immediately trust, NaturalNews it near the top of the list.

  • Naomi B McGraw

    All the lies about the causes of “climate change” today was just another way for our hard earned money to be STOLEN from us !!! YES the climate is changing—–but it does NATURALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!! Check out the history of our climate changes !!!!!!!

  • GENUG

    http://www.columbia.edu/cu/pr/95/18779.html just sayin’…. it’s cyclical and we ain’t doing it.

  • Steve Buckley

    Here’s the problem.
    Climate is SUPPOSED TO CHANGE.
    It’s a constant state of flux.
    Those who believe that the climate is supposed to be steady state don’t understand.

  • sandramonday77

    BS

  • Faye Whiddon

    I’m as old as dirt, and I can declare that the climate has been changing since I can remember…Some summers are hotter…some winters are colder and life goes on. I do not know why…I do not care why, but in MY head, I cannot attribute this global prodigy to any human deed. I was wrong once…in 1956.

  • Stewart Caldwell

    It only takes a minute to view the many graphs and charts on historical climate change all the way back to the Permian, and they all agree. This represents, collectively, hundreds of years of solid scientific research. In the grand scheme, we aren’t that important.

  • alrotundo

    You fucking LIARS. This is FAKE NEWS.,

  • Abdullah The Sheik of Tikrit

    If Allah wants it hot, it is hot. If he wants infidels to freeze, many places freeze. That is all anybody needs to know about climate.

    ALLAH AKBAR

  • mrmars72

    Fake news if there ever was any

  • Bud

    You mean Al lied to everyone to enrich himself, come on every good liberal know money is more evil than Climate Change.

  • Jonathan T Newsom

    We know global warming is a damned hoax. Yet tax payers are still funding designer power like there is no tomorrow. Why has the bullshit flag not been raised on the most wealthy people living on the public dole with their solar panels and filthy windmills littering our once beautiful land? Why do we continue to allow the commie pinkos commit the greatest genocide in history of earth in the name of green?

  • Rick Johnson

    The 97% claims comes from Australia A group of pro climate change scientist were going through some peer review papers on back then “global warming”. The vast majority of the papers did not come down in support or against the theory of man made global warming. Only a small portion of the paper came down as either supporting or against the man made “global warming” claim.

    They took the small portion of those who took a stance on the theory of man made global warming and 97% of those who actually had a preference in the argument came down on the side of man made global warming. Even though only a very small portion of the peer review papers actually came down on either side of the argument. The VAST over whelming majority of the papers did not take a stance either way on the theory of man made global warming.

  • ltc444

    For the last 8 years scientist have been unable to speak out. Their research is dependent on grants and permits from Government agencies controlled not by science but by religious zealots. So they kept their mouths shut, accepted their money and access to conduct their research and waited until a new administration would allow them to publish their work.

  • Patrick

    So after 150 years we will know for shure the climate change agreement worked. So there is no tangible and solid proof of man made. The evidence is circumstantial, so there is no defenate proof yet, we will know for sure decates from now if the Paris Climate Change Agreement is working. And when(if) we have deffinate proof, we will not be around to see this. And hipotetically, those around might not care or they would have found real solutions for renewable energy that doesnt emit CO2, which electricity for electric cars still emit.
    So the Climate Change caused by humans thing is just that, a theory, and that is not ‘scientific’. The same thing people who call themselves scientists with PhD’s demand of religeous people, hypocritical.

  • http://kimhunter.ca/ kim hunter

    Same old tactic.. keep the attention away from the real issues, distract with a drop of doubt, no matter how unfounded or founded for that matter, keeps the machine chugging along for another decade while “officials” talk talk talk, the people and lands continue to be pillaged and poisoned.
    Let keep our eye on the prize and let the talkers talk.
    Sustainable lives, clean air, clean water, clean food and real boots on the ground human rights violations that we can actually do something about.

  • Karl Ruffing

    Old article; the election is past and, thank God, Hillary did not move into the White House. Oh, yeah, I almost forgot, Al Gore invented the internet too, didn’t he?

  • Douglas R Steley

    Former New Scientist correspondent Peter Hadfield says scientists are not experts on every topic, as depicted by the character Brains in Thunderbirds. Rather, they must specialize:
    In between Aaagard and Zylkowski, the first and last names on the petition, are an assortment of metallurgists, botanists, agronomists, organic chemists and so on. … The vast majority of scientists who signed the petition have never studied climatology and don’t do any research into it. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Ph.D. A Ph.D in metallurgy just makes you better at metallurgy. It does not transform you into some kind of expert in paleoclimatology. … So the petition’s suggestion that everyone with a degree in metallurgy or geophysics knows a lot about climate change, or is familiar with all the research that’s been done, is patent crap.[27][28]

  • Rick Mage

    The federal government does not have the enumerated authority to pass any climate change law or make any climate change regulations. It does not matter WHO is in office. So, the duty of the citizens and their states is to nullify ALL unlawful actions of the federal government.

  • Joanie Dornak Wharff

    They just keep spouting their LIES!!!… hoping we are Stupid enough ….Hell….I laughed at them from the beginning!!! Like we are supposed to believe a bunch of Dumb-Ass Politicians????? Just WHAT ARE THEIR QUALIFICATIONS????
    I am SICK & TIRED of these BOOBS!!! They are only in it for the $$$ MONEY $$$ !!!!! Well, I’m NOT BELIEVING THEM from the Get-Go!!! They had NO PROOF !!! And, since…more & more…they are made to look like the BUFOONS THEY ARE !!!!!

  • James Hobson

    Finally people with common sense. The entire climate control crowd or a bunch of small brain peons

  • Lynn Henry

    Thousands of years ago the Earth was in an ice age. Subsequently, the Earth began to warm, and the ice began to recede. This trend has continued til this day. OwlGore making millions selling carbon credits won’t do a thing to stop that trend.

    • rochesternative

      Furthermore, the ice in the Arctic shows virtually no change, with ice cutting machines getting stuck on a regular basis. Climate is always in flux, so we MAY (although I doubt it) be in a warming trend at the moment it will get cold again in a few years.

  • Joyce Lathrop

    We will always have “climate change” but I doubt that man can really change nature!!!

  • Capri142

    Climate change has been going on for eons,…only the idiots on the left think that it can or should be stopped.

  • billybongo

    If climate change was so important and not about money but the world’s future, why isn’t former president Obama and Al Bore aggressively advocating that global warming/climate change is really true and will kill us all? Because they’ve known all along it’s a big lie. Obama was only making approx 50k when he first started as president, but now is a multi-millionaire that benefited from investments that encouraged green industry, along with Big Al. They made their millions under the auspices of a gigantic lie, running to the bank and laughing at green-conscious folk who barely make a living, spending their hard earned cash money purchasing dandelion toilet paper.

  • Anonymous

    Regardless, why are we so opposed to green tech? You call Gore and his cronies “money hungry” or whatever, but really your just a proponent of making oil tycoons rich. Oil is a finite source of fuel, let’s go green for the fact that it’s more sustainable, plus has to have some obvious green climate effects, i.e. Smog.

    • rochesternative

      I will tell you why “we” are so opposed to green tech; and that is it is not sustainable. At this point, there is no profit to be made and in order to make it “work” we have to keep investing money in it. So, I would be happy to use green technology/energy when it becomes equal to, or cheaper than what we have now. I am certainly NOT paying more for electricity because it came from a wind farm rather than hydropower at Niagara Falls. Not planning on buying an electric car either, simply because burning COAL to get electricity, is stupid when we can use oil-to-gasoline for far cheaper. As for oil being finite, yes it is, but we are good for another 200 years with what we have here in the USA, and natural gas is gaining fans also. So, we have TIME before we HAVE to use green energy….time for it to be perfected and made affordable. (and profitable, because without profit, what company is going to WANT to supply it?)

  • James

    Follow the money. ALWAYS FOLLOW THE MONEY! The right amount of money can BUY science!

  • angelo

    Anyone who has taken a course in paleoclimatology knows for approximately 600 years until the mid 1800’s there was a mini ice age (part of the reason Washington had so much trouble with the British were the brutal winters). The earth was much warmer about 2000 years ago than it is now. Since then there has been a natural ebb and flow with a slight warming trend unrelated to man. It’s interesting to note there were documentaries during the late 60’s and early 70’s noting a potential for mass starvation due to global COOLING killing off the winter wheat crop in Canada.

    • James

      That is exactly right! Global COOLING became global WARMING! They can’t even keep their own stories straight.

  • Bill Breeze

    Its on the internet so it must be true. So believe what you will..Have a nice day !!

  • AtheismRules

    A satire site citing a pseudo science woo site ? LOL
    Why not go for the trifecta and add a few alien conspiracy myths ?

  • Vida Galore

    OMG John Coleman again? This is the kind of garbage that will label you as fake news, because it is. Look into Coleman’s background and all of the other deniers. All on the payroll of big oil. Suckers, you’ve been had.

  • Vida Galore

    This is so irresponsible.

  • Vida Galore

    Why have 70% of our animals gone extinct? Just a big coinkydink. And yeah, Fukushima’s not killing the pacific ocean either. And the gulf is just fine, and the bleaching of the great barrier reef in Australia is a big rumor. Jesus. What a piece of garbage article.

  • Vida Galore

    30K scientists is 1% of scientists.

  • Bruce Bosco

    And Hundreds of Thousands and DATA say it isn’t Including NASA this website is Garbage – https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

  • Vida Galore

    http://www.salon.com/2017/04/30/its-the-end-of-the-world-and-we-know-it-scientists-in-many-disciplines-see-apocalypse-soon/ learn something foooools. hundreds of thousands of scientists DO know and have proven climate change is real. Idiots.

  • Finewine69

    Oh for heavens sakes – check out what’s happening in the arctic. Go up there and see for yourselves, if you don’t believe the highly credible climate scientists, all who would make a lot more money denying climate change. The fossil fuel industry pays those shill very handsomely. But don’t believe me, get out of your echo chamber and do your own research.. I realize it’s terrifying to face the truth, but have some courage.

  • Finewine69

    Unfortunately for all of us – facts will remain facts whether you believe them or not. Tell the people who in the Solomon islands that climate change isn’t real.

  • Rachman Cantrell

    This sounds like one of the fake news sites promoting Trump before the election. It is kind of a validation of Trump’s belief that climate change is not real. The last sentence “You might want to take all of this information into serious consideration before casting your vote in the November election.” indicates it was put out in order to do just that.

  • truck300lb

    i lived in California from 1955 to 2005 and from a child to the day i left our spot on the beach was the same low tide and high tide except during storms the sea level IS NOT RISING!

  • baruchzed

    To the author Sean Adl-Tabatabai: Please explain what are the effects of millions of tons of pollutants being pumped into Earth’s atmosphere every year. Make sure you cite ALL your sources, not just a few. Thank you.

  • wrestler154

    I believe the earths climate is changing like it has always done and will always do. I also believe that man has helped the rise in temperature of the planet but we have to work and we have to eat so there is no way that seven point five billion people on the planet is not going to do some damage. However I also believe that crooked politicians which is most of them are willing to make the situation seem much worse if there is a buck in it for them. Live well people, be at peace knowing we are exactly where we are suppose to be…..;)

  • truck300lb

    YES AIR POLLUTION IS A PROBLEM THAT IS BEING TAKEN CARE OF. BUT THE SEA LEVEL IS NOT CHANGING THE EROSION ON OUR BEACH IS THE SAME AND HAS NOT CHANGED FOR THE 61 YEARS OF MY LIFE ANYWAYS.

  • Suede

    People who believe in this SO VERY MUCH should stop driving cars and start riding bicycles. Right??? Are people doing this? Heck, no!

    • rochesternative

      and they should stop eating all that genetically modified food, heaven only KNOWS what trauma is causing the Earth. And moving to a cave to avoid electricity, and I am pretty sure that fancy iphone they are carrying around has some kind of battery acid in it that could damage the environment if it leaks into the ground.

  • Pat Ivey

    That’s why dumping garbage and chemicals in the rivers and oceans. And burning pollutants into our airways, Has no effect on the earth. They’re both fresh and clean today. Drink and breathe without worry. The cool-aid water and fish are fine. Humans have no effect on the earth. I know. Because I have a large green house. And burning stuff in it every day and dump stuff from my garbage into the water I use on the plants. It has no effect on the plants or food I grow there to feed my wife and children. And doesn’t change the temperature at all.

    • acted stupidly

      It’s the sun stupid. Pollution does suck though, but human output is .00001% of the sun’s. By all means clean your local environment, but put the pipe down and stop believing we can cool or warm the earth.

  • Jesse

    eh, I got nothing better to do:

    First, the lovely people who signed that “petition” were doctors, computer programmers, politicians, etc. The list goes on, NOT WEATHER SCIENTISTS. Let’s say you worked on a farm, would you hire a computer scientist or a medical doctor to look after your cattle? No? Then why trust one to tell you about weather? The doctor is inside healing people all day. Never gets a look at the sky and the computer programmer, with his PhD has his face stuck in the monitor.

    Second, Coleman has no cedentials in weather. He has no training. He didn’t go to college for it or anything. Most people in forecasting don’t. Only very few do. Those are called climate scientists and they hold PhDs in weather.

  • ImajWalker

    Mother Nature’s been changing the climate for 1000’s of years.
    She’s TRUSTWORTHY, HONEST, QUALIFIED and doesn’t charge TAXES

    They HAVE to keep the LIE going.. look at the MONEY they’ll lose if they don’t.
    Everyone should DEMAND a refund.. they’d do it to us in a N.Y. minute.

    The 98% of scientists they CLAIM are ‘for’ climate change were staff and not all scientist.
    Search this: IPCC caught fudging data … THAT should tell you how corrupt it all is.

  • Lee

    YourNewsWire is based in Los Angeles and run by Sean Adl-Tabatabai, who registered the website in August 2014.

    Adl-Tabatabai had previously worked with the UK-based conspiracy theorist David Icke as a webmaster and content producer on DavidIcke.com.

    Icke, who has a large cult following, has claimed the moon is a
    “hollowed-out planetoid” and that powerful illuminati control
    governments around the world. Icke also thinks climate change is a hoax.

  • Lee
  • Benjamin Flanagan

    Hey, We Knew it all along!!

  • Steve Bickle
  • Linann M Singh

    That’s what America said. What do the scientist in Europe have to say? I don’t believe anything America media has to push.

  • Joan M Webster

    Apparently those of you who believe this BS about 30,000 scientists didn’t do your fact checking. FOR ONE… this is a fake news website… most everything on here is lies… SECONDLY… those 30,000 signatures were on a Petition that a climate denier started… it was signed by anyone that wanted to sign it… NOT SCIENTISTS… there was no control over who signed it and no confirmation that any of the signatures were Scientists… and for all we know… most of you idiots who believe the crap on this website were part of the thousands who signed that petition… by the way it was from wayyyyyyy back in 1998… so yeah… SUCK IT! Do your homework instead of being so gullible.

    • pezcleo

      Except you can verify 9000 Phds that signed it.

  • h4rj

    Ok. So the organisational backing of this guy includes American energy firms such as Illinois coal. Al Gore made 100m dollars multiply that by 10s of thousands to see what is at stake for conpanies that depend on fossil fuel. John Coleman has a degree in journalism, cannot see gis scientific credential but if Al Gore can make 100m he should be able to make at least a couple of million spouting the conspiracy from the other side. Everyone should ignore them all and if it trully bothers you, start your own neutral and independant research and speak to a scientist.

  • h4rj
  • Marvin

    “9,029 of them hold PhDs in their respective fields”
    Can’t help wondering what their fields might be. There are those who consider even theology a science.

  • Roc RIzzo

    What a steaming pile of bovine fecal matter this is. I have seen climate change throughout my life!

  • Mister Misanthrope

    Until the MSM is brought back to impartiality, the weak minded libs won’t know what to believe.

  • Scientia_Praecepta

    News. Truth. Unfiltered.

    Must be the saddest disconnect to content yet!

  • jd

    WOW! This is a special kind of ignorance here. You guys should try some radiation exposure. People that say it’s harmful are nothing but a bunch of half-baked do gooders! And the elite trying to make money off of not radiation. EVERYONE who agrees that global warming is a hoax should drink radioactive liquids and show unity and that you’re not afraid of nothin’! especially stupid science and Al Gore…

  • john millican

    All those complaining that this is an old post; YOU’RE RIGHT! (may be the only time in your life) The fact is: the REAL scientists stating that the “global warming experts” are wrong or deliberately lying is up to about 50%.

  • CyrilleParis

    How
    to lie with (perhaps) accurate numbers. In the article it is said that
    30,000 scientists signed but less than 10,000 has a PhD. Then what makes
    you a scientist? A high school diploma? Then they add “in their
    respective fields”. So some of these scientists are not expert on
    climate. There could be experts on sociology, or economics, or
    psychology or administration… who knows no more than anybody on the
    subject. The truth is that the more you narrow the field of scientists
    towards climate experts, the more agree with the consensus. Nearly 100%.

    • acted stupidly

      And when you get down to the group who’s grants are 100% funded by governments and climate warming believers, the consensus is unanimous. It’s really amazing.

  • http://trampradio.com/ Tramp

    But, but, but we must do EVERYTHING possible to prevent another ice age like the last one caused by dinosaurs driving SUVs……. Name ONE time in the history of the earth, that the climate DIDN’T change.

  • James Dean

    The way climate fundamentalists have defended their view is with scientific consensus. When asked in a Congressional hearing to give an interpretation of hard evidence refuting climate change theories, proponents have deferred to this “consensus”. They basically admit that the data isn’t good or doesn’t back up their claims, but then they talk about what climate scientists “believe”. I don’t give a crap what scientists “believe”; this is basically an argument from authority and an invitation to take something on faith rather than using reason. Sounds like a religion to me.

  • Neil Sims

    Natural News is a well known purveyor of nonsense, and the National Review’s claims have all been soundly debunked. Unless the idea here is to show how not to be a journalist, using either as a source just means you’ve been duped, or have an agenda.

  • Peter Robertson

    It’s got to be true! In the 80’s many experts were saying that there would be an Ice Age by 2030.Isn’t that climate change? What! Are they now saying it’s going to get hotter? Sorry,I missed this as I still believe the 1980’s lot?@#%$$!

  • FYI

    Climate change is the result kf natural cyclus, and clearly there are a lot of people who’d like to makes us believe differently… http://www.awaken-consciousness.com/blog/2017/02/27/climate-change-has-been-proven-to-be-the-result-of-natural-cycles/

  • Lou Sanders
    • acted stupidly

      If Snopes says so, it must be true. Just ask Dan Rather or Brian Williams.

  • Robert Bennett

    Anyone who advocates for manmade climate change and doesn’t see population growth as the most important problem, just simply isn’t serious.

  • Michael Perkins

    If you accept evolution totally you failed maths at school. Look at progression and try and bind that to random chance, no number is big enough for that chance to occur in the order and manner it has progressed. And all random chance in the universe is on the same path, nothing is random. WTF are those people smoking or sniffing, bloody good shit.

  • skrunyan

    #1: Science is NOT CONSENSUS. It is not about a VOTE among scientists.
    #2: Weather changes. Duh.

  • Don Story

    Grand Solar Minimum 2017.

  • Dominik Rodler

    I doubt there is a single piece of correct information in this piece. I started reading the referenced studies and data and none of it was represented correctly in this article. Just take the paragraph about amount of ice and snow in 2014 and contrast it with this NASA source: “While the Antarctic sea ice yearly wintertime maximum extent hit record highs from 2012 to 2014 before returning to average levels in 2015, both the Arctic wintertime maximum and its summer minimum extent have been in a sharp decline for the past decades. Studies show that globally, the decreases in Arctic sea ice far exceed the increases in Antarctic sea ice.” (https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum)

  • RustyBertrand

    Scientific consensus: Earth’s climate is warming https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

  • David Allen Stanton

    You, ….. you mean, ……… that the Leftist CLIMATE CRACKPOTS are STINKING LIARS???? I’m SHOCKED! SHOCKED, I tell you!! LOL

    (You really can’t expect these deluded charlatan climate HOAXERS to be honest about anything, when their WORLD VIEW itself is a lie.)

  • Diego Deleon

    Oh the left, they are so predictable. When they have no argument they resort to insult and attempts to censor any other voice. They talk so much about FREEDOM of SPEECH and yet look at what they did to MILO YIANOPOLOUS, they are terrified of someone who thinks different and may present a view point that actually makes sense and is based on facts, so they RIOT, THEY BURN, THEY DESTROY and THEY BLOCK. Again so predictable. BLIND SHEEPS!

  • acted stupidly

    It’s the sun, stupid

  • The_White_Rabbit
  • zbobby5

    Before this it was global colding and before that we were running out of water. I’ve never believed this horse sh*t. As Rush always say’s, “follow the money trail.”

  • Free2BeMeUC
  • Alex Dubois

    https://youtu.be/SyUDGfCNC-k

    How this whole thing began…

  • Linda

    Bull sh*t!

  • Eric Beasley

    You guys all know this is a conspiracy theory/satire site, right? This article is complete and utter fabricated bullshit. So is naturalnews.com and nationalreview.com. In this day and age we all need to be way more discerning about where we get our sources of information. Here’s a terrifying article outlining the problem with trying to find legitimate information on the web any more: https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/06/how-the-trump-russia-data-machine-games-google-to.html

  • Leon Lane II

    I just came across this article and laughed until my sides hurt. There is a huge problem with this article. Thirty thousand scientists sounds like a lot until you do the math and then you realize this number is not “staggering”. We don’t know the actual number of scientists globally but a safe estimate is 3x that of the United States’ 6.2 million scientist, or 18.6 million scientist globally. Now when you divide 30,000 by 18,600,000 you end up with .016. Multiply this by 100 and you get the percentage or .16%, not even two tenths of a percent. This would mean that 99.84% of the world’s scientists did not sign the document. Even if we just do the math based on the number of scientists in the U.S. we still end up with 99.52% of scientist did not sign the document. I think that the statement that 97% of the world’s scientist believe humans are contributing to global warming is pretty safe.

    • nickshaw

      When compared to the 1200 scientists the survey was sent to to derive the “97% agree with AGW” from the 700 who actually responded, it should make you chuckle even more.
      But, it won’t, will it? 😉

  • Portia Hardesty

    Yeah. . . um, could you name three of these ‘alleged’ scientists?

  • Jean Doucette Squires

    you’re on drugs if you think its a hoax, all you have to do is look at videos of the icebergs melting and the animals losing they homes in the north!

    • TG

      I saw a heart breaking video of a thin starving polar bear wandering on the ice … Climate Scientists claimed it was starving because the ice pack had melted so much it could no longer hunt seals… after it died an autopsy was done on the bear and it was later leaked that it was actually very old for a polar bear in the wild and it died of natural causes… it had lost many teeth and was simply too old, feeble and blind to hunt to support itself.
      Why would these scientists lie about how the polar bear actually died of natural causes…? To promote their agenda…?
      You would think they wouldn’t need to lie and there would be enough evidence of this catastrophe happening… if it really was happening.

  • Portia Hardesty

    This is total BEE ESS!!!

  • http://dlarochellemd.com dave larochelle

    The swamp creatures are rolling in the muck to get our President for any excuse.

  • Earl Kliethermes

    This old bullshit from last year has already been disproven by hoax-slayer.

  • David William Pomarnke

    As BS an article as was ever written. Shame on those who willingly lie about the reality of climate change.

  • George Edward Booker

    A lot of statements are made in this article, but no evidence is presented!

  • Adam Won

    Perfectly Good people who turn their critical thinking over to conservative leaders and alleged Christians, have defiled the gift of a powerful mind that came from the Lord. Science is also a part of a Godly world and this nonsense is pure fallacious anti-science.

  • George Edward Booker
  • DWS

    What I find really interesting, is that many years ago when independent climate scientists were noticing some strange changes in our climate, back then they concluded that it was being caused by human activity. Once the idea catches on, and the fossile fuel industries start to get worried about losing their fortunes, all of a sudden 30,000 scientists appear out of nowhere saying it’s a haox.

    I think the fossil fuel industry has learned a few tricks from the tobacco industry and sugar industry, don’t you think?

  • TG

    Science is fallible… the latest estimate of what we actually know is “Fact” is about 3% of knowing everything we can possibly conceive in our mind at this time… in other words… we are 97% in the dark about everything and that’s a liberal projection.
    We are to be kept in the dark simply because it is easier to keep sheep who don’t know how to open the gate…

  • kwameoh

    “A staggering 30,000 scientists” is a sentence that makes no scientific sense , given the world population, i think staggering is a hoax “grin”

  • Jerry Olive

    I just like the picture.