Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents

Discussion in 'Politics' started by nitro, Jun 16, 2015.

  1. dbphoenix

    dbphoenix

    It seems to me I've heard that song before
    It's from an old familiar score I know it well, that melody

    I know each word because I've heard that song before
    The lyrics said, "Forevermore" Forevermore's a memory

    --Sammy Cahn
     
    #131     Jun 23, 2015

  2. [​IMG]
     
    #132     Jun 23, 2015
  3. wildchild

    wildchild

    Now there is an endorsement. That confirms the whole global warming scam is indeed a scam. It seems like the Catholic Church's whole reason for existence is to be on the wrong side of history.
     
    #133     Jun 23, 2015
    TooOldForThis likes this.
  4. jem

    jem

    #134     Jun 23, 2015
  5. jem

    jem

    How come you nutters can't find one peer reviewed paper showing man made co2 causes warming.

    I though you all said all the scientists were on your side.


    once again here is a list of 1350 skeptical papers.

    http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html#Sensitivity

    and if you think I am bullshitting...

    here is a quote from Lobos Motl below about this list...

    and even John Cook - you know him... hes the guy running the site fraudcurrents is always citing... the one paid for by al gore.
    ----

    "A tour de force list of scientific papers..."
    - Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Environmental Scientist


    "Wow, the list is pretty impressive ...It's Oreskes done right."
    - Luboš Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physicist


    "I really appreciate your important effort in compiling the list."
    - Willie Soon, Ph.D. Astrophysicist and Geoscientist


    "...it's a very useful resource. Thanks to the pop tech team."
    - Joanne Nova, Author of The Skeptics Handbook


    I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech's list..."
    - John Cook, Cartoonist at Skeptical Science


    again... here is a list of 1350 peer reviewded papers supporting skeptical arguments against AGW alarmism.



    http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html#Sensitivity
     
    #135     Jun 23, 2015
  6. dbphoenix

    dbphoenix

    IOW, blah blah blah blah blah
     
    #136     Jun 23, 2015
  7. Ricter

    Ricter


  8. You are giving it too much weight. One less blah.

    I'm really starting to feel sorry for jem now.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2015
    #138     Jun 23, 2015
    • Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as evidenced by increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, the widespread melting ofsnow and ice, and rising global average sea level.[5]
    • Most of the global warming since the mid-20th century is very likely due to human activities.[6]
    • Benefits and costs of climate change for [human] society will vary widely by location and scale.[7] Some of the effects in temperate and polar regionswill be positive and others elsewhere will be negative.[7] Overall, net effects are more likely to be strongly negative with larger or more rapid warming.[7]
    • The range of published evidence indicates that the net damage costs of climate change are likely to be significant and to increase over time.[8]
    • The resilience of many ecosystems is likely to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate change, associated disturbances (e.g. flooding, drought, wildfire,insects, ocean acidification) and other global change drivers (e.g. land-use change, pollution, fragmentation of natural systems, over-exploitation of resources).[9]

    No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these main points. The last national or international scientific body to drop dissent was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists,[10]
     
    #139     Jun 23, 2015
  9. Ricter

    Ricter

    Rofl.
     
    #140     Jun 23, 2015