JC's global warming denial...

Rabid ecologists, rabid deniers - all in the same concentration camp. Ah.
 
Cool. We're all really made up for you.

You are talking crap, BTW.

lol, do you not have humor where you come from?

hint: I'm joking.:banana:
Rabid ecologists, rabid deniers - all in the same concentration camp. Ah.
I only see the "sky is falling" crew represented here, I don't see anyone flat out denying global warming or WTFever.
 
Global warming, happening because of people or natural climate change, is a great thing. You know how cold winter is here? We deserve a break!

I hear that, the only reason why I can get to University in the morning during the winter is because of the huge ground clearance in my Ram. :lol:
 
Last edited:
How would going vegetarian help? If the whole world was vegetarian would we kill all the cows? Probably not. Which would leave us with too many cows, and a growing population. Which already produce more CO2 than cars. We should be all be carnivores and reduce this population. Eat more beef I say!
 
why is it that there are a lot more scientists who criticize the relatively unknown "great global warming swindle" than scientists who criticize "an inconvenient truth"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle#Reactions_from_scientists

the producers of "the great global warming swindle" even deliberately misrepresented scientists who they interviewed for this "documentary"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle#Carl_Wunsch_controversy

oh and they had "scientists" in this "documentary" which are known to have been paid for by the tobacco industry to spin the truth for them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Singer

because its trendy as hell to go with the flow, and that flow is the enviremental movement, plus have you even looked at the claims of inaccuracy, i did because i wanted to make sure i wasn't watching a bullshit program, and what i found was all of the inaccuracies were stupid pin pricks in comparison to what you hear alot of GW enthusiasts (thats what im calling them now) talk about

Carl Wunsch-He only had 3 freaking lines in the documentary if i remember right, and he never specifically said anything about global warming, so i don't see how he was mis-represented, and either-way its not like they drugged him

The graphs- i looked at the supposed falsified graph and the graph its based off of, the only difference i saw was that the one in the straightened out as to look less crazy, it was more the mean score of every year rather the exact detail of every day (which does look messy as hell)


Gore-the fact that Al Gores main point is completely bassackwards kinda defeats all of his credibility, of course why would anybody question somebody who is going with the trend, he must be right, right?


Sun spots- furthermore i read reaction portrayed by many prominent scientist (frighteningly) , for example the debate on cosmic rays which greenies use to dislodge the theory of the sun-spots heating up the earth, if you do even a second of research you'll find that sun-spots (the things climatologists actually relate to earth temperatures, not just "cosmic rays" which is a generaly term for all cosmic rays) actually create something called a forbish decrease, which essentially means the solar wind sweeps away the other cosmic rays, and what hits earth is mostly just they solar rays.

Basically its nuts to say sunspots aren't related to global temperature because of current trends in cosmic rays, because the two are very different in their effects on earth and your not even talking about the same thing

Fred Singer-One bad apple in the bunch doesn't mean the rest of the scientists are worthless, its worth keeping in mind all the people in the movie that originally were for global warming, as well as they enviroment, and now seem proof positive that anthropogenic global warming is exaggerated bullcrap
 
Last edited:
GW enthusiasts (thats what im calling them now)
That's Gold! I'm so stealing that! :mrgreen:

I remember reading a comment from a GWI about the graph in 'A Global Warming Swindle' that showed an 800 year lag between temperature change and CO2. I don't remember the comment word-for-word but the jist was:

"There may be an 800 year lag but when you look at the total 400,000 years of data that they have you can't even see the 800 year gap."

That's just the dumbest thing I've ever heard!

"yeah, the gap exists but if you zoom out far enough you can't even see it." :rolleyes:
 
Top