|My new 150 page horror coloring book for (traumatizing) kids is now FOR SALE on the INTERNET WEB!|
Not articles full of global generalizations on the state of the climate. Specific papers, which were written to specifically refute the ones I have posted. Are you capable of comprehending that?
That's a nonsensical and highly unprofessional request. You're putting the burden of proof on others and asking that a negative claim be refuted. I could say the moon doesn't exist. That doesn't mean I'm right until someone refutes me; the evidence in favor of the moon's existence speaks for itself, as does the evidence for anthropogenic climate change. Directly refuting crackpots only serves to make them feel justified.
I have also noticed several times in the past when people commenting on your journals have asked for links to prove your contention. You blew them off, ignored the question, changed the subject. You can't answer them because you've never actually read or tried to comprehend anything that doesn't fit your hystericyst world-view, otherwise known as AGW- all you have ever seen, is the propaganda you parrot onto this site.
Who did I blow off? When? I always provide information I'm asked for.
Then millions of scientists must live in Poverty, according to your claim. Again, can you prove it? Show us what the poor, timid little scientists are making. You make it sound like it was below minimum wage.
What do you make as a "geologist?"
You would have us believe that these scientist exist purely to find the truth. That they have NO motivations whatsoever beyond that. No reason to lie, cheat, or steal. No possible way they could ever succumb to political or financial pressures to conform to, say, a 'consensus.'
And you would have us believe that, beyond all sense and reason, a massive number of scientists who aren't even working for the same people, projects, fields or even countries are all working hard to push the same agenda?
There are just as many people who would pay a scientist to deny AGW as would pay them for positive findings. In fact, the people with the most money of all are already the ones whose best interest is to stomp on environmental conservation. And yet, scientific consensus still defies them.
What we see is not only overwhelming consistency from the science supporting AGW, but the predictable level of incompetence, contradiction and flip-flopping from the very few who board the denialism bandwagon.
For fuck's sake, the lead denialist organization has self-proclaimed "psychics" on its staff.
Peer review has been corrupted www.evolutionnews.org/2011/09/…
A stem-cell scientist takes in 'millions' for fraudulent research www.explorestemcells.co.uk/ste…
And very likely expected to make millions on the patents!</b>
Activist climate scientists like hansen and mann make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in speaking fees. Not to mention a cool million-plus, that hansen 'forgot' to report wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/18…
And this speaks poorly of climate science as a whole....how? All I said was that there's no logical way for your interpretation of a world-wide hoax to exist.
An IPCC scientist himself, complains about political pressure and interference in writing climate policy papers www.robertstavinsblog.org/2014…
And you are somehow Incapable of seeing or acknowledging that these things and tens of thousands more, are happening all around you? When did people who became scientists, STOP being human, that you think some few of them would not stoop to such things? Especially when the pressure is political / ideological.
The political and ideological pressure is different in every single cultural climate and applies differently to every individual person. If the climate consensus were driven primarily by fraud it would be nowhere near as universal and consistent as it is around the world.
The Tropical Hot Spot that was supposed to be proof of the theory, never materialized fav.me/d6mei4e
</b>Your graph, as usual, only shows that the "worst case scenario" didn't pan out, but that the predicted climate patterns most certainly did.
Claim after claim after claim has been shown by nature itself, to be wrong kajm.deviant art.com/art/The-Ar…
An increase from two years ago does not defy AGW behavior. Al Gore is not a scientific authority. I actually never heard a thing about him or knew he had anything to say on the subject until you claimed he was where I got my information.
Your 'golden standard' in climate science, the IPCC, is full of errors kajm.deviantart.com/art/IPCC-D…
Since when was the IPCC my golden standard?
You are a know-nothing troll, a parrot. You have been raised to live in Fear of the weather and you and yours are going to do tremendous damage to this world trying to 'fix' it.
What "tremendous damage?" Even the completely truthful and accurate criticisms you hurl at wind farms don't make them a fraction as horrific as fracking or coal plants.
Interesting that you once again claim that only humans can be responsible for the current warming comments.deviantart.com/4/2238…
Yet you want us to believe that you have never claimed humans are 100% responsible? Even one of your climate gods, gavin schmidt, claims 110%!
I've never heard that man's name in my life.
However, you're still wildly misunderstanding things here.
Obviously, climate changes on its own to a degree. Therefore, humans are not 100% responsible for all climate behavior.
They ARE responsible for an abnormal exacerbation of climate behavior.
Every time you claim someone 'denies' climate change, you are LYING.
You deny any existence at all of anthropogenic climate change. People know that's what I'm referring to.
|I'm a cartoonist, biology enthusiast and horror fan born on Halloween. I have a life long passion for bizarre creatures of every sort, whether real-world invertebrates from the deepest ocean trenches or buggy eyed space mutants from low budget cinema. I run the modestly popular bogleech.com and have also written for Cracked.|