Global warming hoax fools millions

Discussion in 'Politics' started by wilburbear, Aug 13, 2008.

  1. Illum

    Illum

    I could care less about global warming. I do see a danger that could end in millions of lives lost. A logical conclusion to this whole argument is that there are too many people, and there is a solution to that. Have we moved beyond that insanity? Probably. If so, then I have no problem with cap and trade. It would destroy the third world up and comers and give us a fighting chance. Which I assume is the real agenda for Europe who's economy is being destroyed and now us.
     
    #221     Dec 5, 2009

  2. ahh yes ....


    the truth will eventually be exposed.... this was all about CULLING THE HERD



    The ANTI-IRONY ...


    The COOLAID DRINKERS COMMIT MASS SUICIDE



    Here's a suggestion... Begin With The End of Yourself
     
    #222     Dec 5, 2009
  3. Good post.

    My favorite is the fact that they INTENTIONALLY threw away the original, source data.

    I wouldn't trust any of the global warming crowd, even if they told me there was something more than 5lbs. of ice at the North Pole. They have now been discredited as a source of data. I would trust a reliable scientist on this issue.

    EVERYONE, INCLUDING the pro-hoax posters on this thread, agree with their move to fire their head of climate research in England.
     
    #223     Dec 5, 2009
  4. Ummm... no, they didn't. If you're talking about the tree ring data, it was published 10 years ago in Nature. It was peer reviewed and rejected as erroneous.
     
    #224     Dec 5, 2009

  5. still waiting for the answer to my question ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question


    I guess it is still not open for debate.
     
    #225     Dec 5, 2009
  6. Ummm... time to grow up and stop being naive.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/282951
     
    #226     Dec 5, 2009

  7. these people need to be lined up and shot

    I just hope that the right shows some resolve, and actually prosecutes these people.


    BigDave, Vhen, Ricther ... will be forgiven. They are simply stooges and useful-idiots.
     
    #227     Dec 5, 2009
  8. The researchers did not use certain tree ring data post 1960 because it was not properly calibrated to instrumental data. There has been much hoo-hah about this "throwing out" of data when really it is the instrumental data that matters, not the proxy data.

    And it was released and studied a decade ago, it's not even new:

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v391/n6668/abs/391678a0.html
     
    #228     Dec 6, 2009
  9. slacker

    slacker

    A very good summary of the issues of fraud and criminal intent:
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/understanding_climategates_hid.html

     
    #229     Dec 6, 2009
  10. "a good summary"
    ..............




    These fucking people deserve tp have golf balls driven straight into their temples
     
    #230     Dec 6, 2009