Out of 13,950 only 23 article peer reviewed articles dispute Man Made Climate Change

None of it is changing the planet's climate...sorry.

 

Are you serious? Even if we add in your 1100 papers, the percentage of "skeptics" is still only 7.5%.
So if you consulted with 10 doctors, you'd take the advice of 3 doctors over the advice of 7 doctors?

 

Hell yes, if the "7 doctors" were part of a PROVEN TO BE CORRUPT, DISINFORMATION NETWORK, as is the "climate change peer review" process, as has been documented THOROUGHLY here....

 

Its all lies, dude.

Earth was way way hotter long before people

 

So 12,000 climate researchers are "part of a PROVEN TO BE CORRUPT, DISINFORMATION NETWORK". I'd sure like to see that proof. All you've given me is the names of 6 scientists who have never been charged with a single crime. Don't suppose you'd like to show your proof of the other 11,994 links to the network? Oh wait! I just remembered; only proponents of AGW need to show proof. The pseudo-scientists get a pass and only need to make accusations.
BTW, what ever happened to Inhof's promised investigation of fraud?

 

Glad you cleared that up. Why would I bother to learn about the science when I have your word?

The price of tea in China is going up.

 

So Earth has not been hotter than it is now, according to "Warmist Science"? How did they make that "scientific determination"...did the IPCC draw straws?

 

What makes you think youre learning anything from UN Communists who want the US to pay them taxes?

 

Yeah, they picked some straws off your strawman.

 

Dinosaurs Experienced Wild Shifts in Climate

Dinosaurs died from sudden temperature drop 'not comet strike', scientists claim

Frosty Times for Dinosaurs: Major Fall in Temperature 137 Million Years Ago During Cretaceous Greenhouse Period, Evidence Shows

 

Really? You really want to go with that? OK
So it's the "UN communists" who developed quantum mechanics?
So it's the "UN communists" who formulated the Stefan-Boltzmann Law?
So it's the "UN communists" who discovered the conservation of energy/mass?
So it's the "UN communists" who measured how much solar energy the earth absorbs?
So it's the "UN communists" formulated Beer's Law?

 

Oh goody! Three more strawmen. Pretty soon you'll have an army; but they still won't be able to do any damage to AGW.

 

bullcrap

- - - Updated - - -

You sure dont like facts much.....

go tell the chinese how much money they owe you....

 

Perhaps you should look up the definition of what a "Straw Man" argument is. If you were NOT disputing Best Viewed's claim about the Earth, WTF were you blathering about?

You then posted in response:

I repeat:

If you were NOT disputing Best Viewed's claim about the Earth, WTF were you blathering about?

 

states he who answers my facts with "bullcrap". Too funny!

The Chinese owe me nothing; I do not drink Chinese tea.

 

If you dont provide a source.... whose to say, youre telling the truth...

 

from wiki:
"A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[SUP][3][/SUP] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4]"
[/SUP]Cable: "Earth was way way hotter long before people"
No one ever made the claim that earth was not hotter long before people. Cable misrepresented the AGW position. Cable is attempting to use the statement (a statement no proponent of AGW ever denied) "Earth was way way hotter long before people" to refute AGW. Classic Strawman argument; an argument related to AGW as the statement "the price of tea in china is going up" is related to AGW; ie not related at all.

Glad I could help!

I'm still waiting for your proof that 11,994 researchers are "part of a PROVEN TO BE CORRUPT, DISINFORMATION NETWORK".
I'm still waiting for Inhof's fraud investigation.
I have a feeling I'll be waiting for quite some time.

 

Now you're just trolling.
But then again I'm not surprised. You seem to have no background in science, physics or history.

 

You have no background in providing links to prove your assumptions.....

- - - Updated - - -

 

Her point was that , obviously, it isn't humans that cause the planet to warm, in terms of geological history.

Only a Leftist would need "an investigation" to tell then what they read with their own two eyes.

I have provided the quotes that INDISPUTABLY PROVE the conspiracy to corrupt the peer review process, by Mann, Jones, etal.
Post #131, etal.

Review the thread, or just keep pretending that everyone hasn't already read them, or that we need an "expert" to tell us what they say.

 

What part of PEER REVIEW WAS COMPROMISED do you not get? Would you like a complete dissertation on it? Too friggin bad.

 

It's not surprising conservatives are always on the opposite side of experts, scientists, economists, the educated, etc. I guess if you just think you're right, that's all that matters to be a conservative. Sort of the Sarah Palin/Rick Perry logic!

 

Still presenting the strawman, I see. This time I'll let you figure out why it's a strawman argument.

I do not see the names nor the proof of any wrongdoing of the 11,994 scientists in post 131.

I don't need to review the thread. You've offered no proof; none of the researchers have been charged with fraud despite Inhof's promise. All researchers are innocent until proven guilty.

 

Then why should we accept this:
1100+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarm

- - - Updated - - -

Prove it!

Photoshopped pictures. None of the covers have a date. All Time magazines covers have dates on them

 

Says the guy that voted for a guy that said FDR went on TV when the stock market crashed to reassure the American people.(even though FDR wasn't president at the time and there was no such thing as broadcast TV at the time) Right in front of the same (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) "reporter" that asked Sarah Palin what newspapers she read, as if it was an accusation of incompetence.

You'll buy anything.