The Great Global Warming Swindle

[Biggs3535]

Fantastic article by an astrophysicist

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2011/05/31/136817357/science-deniers-hand-over-your-cellphones?sc=fb&cc=fp

The first line of the article: "Science says the sun will rise again tomorrow."

I guess this could be the reason why we disagree. The science I believe in says the sun doesn't rise, the earth rotates. You don't seem to look at the details quite as much as due diligence would require.

lol

[beardmcdoug]

Fantastic article by an astrophysicist

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2011/05/31/136817357/science-deniers-hand-over-your-cellphones?sc=fb&cc=fp

The first line of the article: "Science says the sun will rise again tomorrow."

I guess this could be the reason why we disagree. The science I believe in says the sun doesn't rise, the earth rotates. You don't seem to look at the details quite as much as due diligence would require.

oh lol, you don't understand satire, do you?

did you bother to read the actual article, or are you just one of those "headline readers"?  i'd wager hard on the latter

[dbucfan]

Do you really believe the author of the article you posted?

[spartan]

The author of that article is a fool, and very typical of holier than thou environmentalist.

Don't believe everything thing that I say - your'e an idiot and need to be ostracized.
Question one iota of the "settled science" - you're an idiot and need to be ostracized.

[bradentonian]

The author of that article is a fool, and very typical of holier than thou environmentalist.

Don't believe everything thing that I say - your'e an idiot and need to be ostracized.
Question one iota of the "settled science" - you're an idiot and need to be ostracized.

That's not what he said at all.  He encouraged skepticism as a healthy and necessary component of science.
His issue was that some people pick and choose what bits of science they want to believe to support their biases (just like they do with religion)

[dbucfan]

Don't spin it - it is very clear in how it was written.  If you don't agree you're a denier - if you're a denier you're an idiot.  So - you either agree with the "scientists" or you're an idiot.  Doesn't matter if they created data to fulfill their conclusions.  In fact nothing else matters - if you're a denier - you're an idiot. 

[spartan]

Yes, he mentioned some "healthy skepticism" but then went on to say all their doubts had already been put to rest. So they are not fools, just ignorant. You so much as raise an eyebrow on the "settled science" and they turn on you like a pack of dogs.

From day one, the solution has been to take gobs of money from the west, regardless of the impact and give it to the poor countries. This ignoring countries like India and China who are belching more crap into the ozone each and every day.

Oh yea, gotta love the millions and millions of $ being spent on all the climate change related "studies" that need to be done. You know, the impact of global warming on the lesser spotted warbling newt, and the impact of Global warming on the gay lifestyle in downtown Rio. It's a self perpetuating feeding fest.

Last but not least, is it coincidence that many of the key players in the Environmental/Climate change movement are ex-socialist and marxists who jumped on the Environmental bandwagon when the Berlin Wall came crashing down? Probably not considering the solutions being proposed.

[John Galt?]

Fantastic article by an astrophysicist

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2011/05/31/136817357/science-deniers-hand-over-your-cellphones?sc=fb&cc=fp

It wasn't an article, it was an op-ed piece based on responses to a blog. I should have just stopped at npr.org

[The White Tiger]

So, a blogger can list a quid pro quo - and then recite, incant, list lie after lie about the hoax of MMGW/anthropogenic warming period - citing debunked data that has been proven to be knowingly "cooked"...

...and then you keep repeating the lie - making it a BIGGER lie - while you insist that everyone must believe...it is no longer a lie...

...and that's OK?

See, only by misusing "science" can you support your preconcieved political notion. When you dictate the infallability of science - then use it to assert that only YOUR point of view is correct  - you seem to think that everyone will then conclude that all OTHER views are idiotic.

...and suddenly you have become that which you detest - believers...

So, man must admit he bears responsibility for the condition of the Earth, and then he must accept (faith) data that is NOT conclusive (and has actually been proven to be knowingly falsified)?

I think you guys have already illustrated you have a problem with this type of belief - haven't you?