More evidence that the GW crowd is using junk science

[Rooster]

So, LTS, does all the political activity and funding that Tom Steyer pays for Global Warming Fearmongering equate to the Koch brothers? After all, according to your definition of political activism they are opposite sides of the same coin. Where is all your anguish and hand wringing for his nefarious interference in the process?

[LTS TRN 2]

But SS, while you claim that the Climate Change scientists are in on some kind of scam, you offer nothing whatever to support this claim. And yet there is no dispute that your denial position is standing shoulder to shoulder with Sarah Palin, James Inhofe, and similar Christer morons. The leading "expert' denialists have been clearly revealed to be paid shills--the leading "expert' receiving $1.2 million for his denial opinion. So...why aren't you embarrassed?

[LTS TRN 2]

All you're doing is reciting the catechism of Inhofe and Palin. The evidence of Climate Change is overwhelming on several fronts. Ocean acidification, for example. desertification for another. You r auto-dismissal of actual scientific bodies such as NASA as being part of a scam is shameless and just a cheap Rusp Limpdick-like weaseling.

Here,
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

and more,

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/

These are actual non-biased and non-whored out shills. And of course you can't refute their evidence. Just like you can't support any part of the 9/11 report.

[Dinsdale]

Ocean acidification

Swing-and-amiss.

Ocean pH varies quite wildly, and has since well before the industrial revolution, over short periods. But I forgot -- in the "new science," correlation/coincidence = proof.


And anyone who passed a 101 level chemistry class understand how laughable this "evidence" is.

[LTS TRN 2]

So all you've got is more simplistic dismissals--in the manner of Rusp Limpdick's fierce anti-intellectual appeal to the moronic Tea Bagger contingent.

Here's actual scientific data about ocean acidification

http://www.nrdc.org/oceans/acidification/

http://ocean.si.edu/ocean-acidification


And of course, as with all the other evidence, you can't refute any of it.

[Dinsdale]

http://junkscience.com/2014/12/22/marit ... rch-fraud/

Yup, once again, the "new science" comes into play -- if the data doesn't support the desired outcome, go back and alter it.

And the whole "ocean acidification" hysteria/boondoggle doesn't fly with anyone with even a basic understanding of chemistry... seriously, it's laughable. And what's really sad, it the people working the scam around it know full well it's garbage.

[Rooster]

What cracks me up is when I hear the words, "the science is settled" in relation to AGW. Note that this is said about a subject about which little is known and even less understood. But it is particularly funny because as we just saw last week the supposed "science" of something so settled as cholesterol and how bad it is for you has been completely turned on its' head. Now those smarty pants scientists are saying, "Umm, never mind what we've been preaching for the past forty years. You can eat bacon again. Sorry about that."

If food's effects-- something we are intimately familiar with --can be found to be 180* out from what was boldly "known" then it is safe to say we shouldn't be making world wide adjustments to our economies and industries based on something utterly speculative. ESAD, you Chicken Littles.

[LTS TRN 2]

Who and what are you fake asshole fraudulent cowardly evasive paid-off whored-out prostituted hollowed cadavers?

Why do you persist? Are you like mosquitoes? Just buzzing on some simple vein of temporary existence ?

You can't speak or reason, make a joke or respond to an actual idea. What are you? And why do you insist on clogging up breathable air?

[Carson]

Sorry, I had chili last night.