These days when you point out the freezing temperatures, they just smygly tell you that it isn’t global warming anymore, it’s “climate change”. So there you have it, folks. Everytime the weather gets unfriendly, these eco-fascists will just claim it’s a result of mankind’s own selfishness, and run with that. It’s the modern version of original sin.

the whole ad was a bald faced, deliberate lie.
Posted by Christopher_Taylor

I saw that last night, with Noah Somebody, and that’s exactly what I said to my better half “that’s a bald faced lie, how do they get away with that?”. It’s just so brazen.

A couple hundred miles north of me are the polar bear hunts, a few years before my present location I lived in Barrow, Alaska. The Inuit just shake their heads at this nonsense, there’s plenty of bears, more than ever.

The whole ad was about how polar bears are dying out and going extinct and how people should send them money to help the bears.

I seriously hate that lying ad with all my heart.

You’re the flat earth gang and you’re a laugh track.
Posted by Jack Schite
2010-01-04 15:53:17

Projection AGAIN!!??!?! Please Jack Auf provide proof that the Earth is warming, that man is responsible, and give us a firm number for the accepted global mean tempurature.

You’re the flat earth gang and you’re a laugh track.
Posted by Jack Schite 2010-01-04 15:53:17

WOW! You have really cut us to the quick here, Jack Schite. Condemning us for something we never said or advocated. What a master debater you are!

Sorry to have to tell you, but your Religion of AGW if as worthless and false a religion as that of the pedophile prophet. Too Bad.

Jack Schite 2010-01-04 15:53:17
I think You misunderstood. We said your head is flat, not the earth.

Funny how the Inuit don’t know sh*t about polar bears. I thought we were supposed to respect the knowledge of nature that our noble natives possessed.

yep, they’re all noble people in tuned to the land until they start disregarding libs sacred cows. Then they’re taitnted by Western Civilzation and corrupted. Funny (and sad) how that works out.
Posted by Hotspur
2010-01-04 16:50:5

Your kidding, right?

Sad is only that you are unwilling to respect their culture.

Hey, rmiller, let the Inuit hunt polar bears like they want to. That would be respecting their culture.

While we’re at it, I’d like to invite you up here to Washington. You can watch a Makah whale hunt! Won’t that be fun?

rmiller,

Why do you feel the need to “agree” with a hypothesis you agree has yet to be proven? Seems like a faith based statement on your part.

Though I agree that MMGW exists, I think we have yet to prove it…

Nixon has asked before, but are you retarded?

they’re all noble people in tuned to the land…
Posted by Hotspur
2010-01-04 16:50:59

They may understand the land but natives are no conservationists, they’re as much, if not more, scorched earth policy as any other culture.

To CavalierX:

Funny you should mention that! Just the other day I read “The True History of Slavery” by Thomas Sowell. (It’s a section in his book “Black Rednecks & White Liberals.”) It’s damned informative. Basically, and quite refreshingly, he points out how slavery was a global phenomenon and it was Western Civilization that snapped out of it first — and thank God they had the guts to play “world cop” and go smack everyone else for it.

Mike – I’ll add the following:

Why, given all those scientists who are so vociferous in their support of MMCC, have none of them come up with a conclusive and repeatable experimental design which unequivocally establishes a causal link between the presence or absence of atmospheric CO2 and mean global temperature?

How is it that we can believe your predictions, when the last ten years of data don’t support them in the least? Posed another way, why should we believe your predictions when the first ten years after you made them, climate moved in the opposite direction of your prediction?

Why should we accept computer simulations as evidence, when there is no hard science there to support them?

Why do climate alarmists routinely ignore or downplay the rich geological record which serves as evidence of thousands of warm and cold climate periods, ranging back to the earliest rocks we can find on Earth, and all of which happened long before mankind appeared on earth to ‘pollute’ it?

Why, when our Sun is the source of an overwhelming majority of Earth’s energy (and therefore heat), is the role of the Sun in shaping our current climate treated so dismissively by those who support the social and financial controls which come with a world-view in which mankind is responsible for the vagaries of climate?

What are you prepared to do to compensate those who took your advice and purchased dozens of mercury-filled and toxic CFL light bulbs in order to support your myth of man-caused climate change? Do you expect that those of us who were smart enough to see through the deception to pay for your mistakes?

In a similar vein, what do you expect those of us who saw through the deception to do with the coming surge of large discarded batteries from cars. Even if we all believed in the MMCC faith, haven’t we just traded one ecological disaster for another? How “smart” is that?

When all this lunacy is finally put to rest, are you going to apologise (maybe I should say confess your sins, since most alarmists are operating on faith, just as any good religious acolyte does) for the impact your alarmism has had on the people and institutions around you? I suppose repayment is out of the question, eh?

If you get through Mike’s list of questions, try mine.

“If you get through Mike’s list of questions, try mine.”

Oh right, take all the sciency questions… ;)

CFLs have already been a disaster. Just wait until the lawsuits start rolling in from mercury poisoning.

Hybrids aren’t too far behind, especially once word gets out about them being a black hole for rare earth metals. I wonder how long it will be before we see the movie “Blood Hybrid”, where Leo DeCaprio and his phony accent fight African warlords and their armies of child slaves strip mining for conflict metals.

All the recent hoopla has been about tree ring chronologies showing a stable climate. But what about the cherry blossom chronology published in 1994 that lead to the first Kyoto climiate conference in 1997? I looked at it and at first glance it seemed to support the tree rings. But upon reviewing the methodology I realised that there was a calendar error introduced to the data that skewed the results. I managed to correct them resulting in a new graph that shows the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age that the warmists claim don’t exist. You can see both the original studies and how correcting the data shows a completely different story here:

http://knowledgedrift.wordpress.com/