jmog;1658642 wrote:I knew that was the EXACT article you would quote eventually...

So, here is the one I bookmarked this morning just waiting for you to post this...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCwQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fheartland.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2F10-2012_myth_of_the_98_percent.pdf&ei=Xm8pVOLUGoSRyQTY7oHgAw&usg=AFQjCNGW6CG2rLf7Lc8TDMKp_RzwMDKiKQ&sig2=nt7Q5uzckBB78yj-mBF7gg&bvm=bv.76247554,d.aWw&cad=rja

LMFAO, you're seriously trying to use the HEARTLAND institute as your backup? The same org that worked with Tobacco to try and disproveon the dangers of smoking?

"In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks to secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health reforms. "

That organization is funded by energy companies, it's a total joke non respected organization. jmog, for the love of God, put some of this BS you're reading through a BS filter.

LMFAO, talk about an LOLFAIL:

In February 2012, environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, obtained internal Heartland Institute documents by deceptive means, and divulged them, together with an additional document that he later claimed to have received from an unknown source, to public websites.[SUP][58][/SUP] The documents contained the 2012 Heartland budget, a fundraising plan and board materials.[SUP][59][/SUP] The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute – including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts. Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments.[SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also indicated that the institute planned to provide materials to teachers in the United States to undercut the teaching of global warming in schools.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also appeared to disclose Heartland's plans for "Operation Angry Badger", in which $612,000 was to be allocated for activities related to Wisconsin's recall elections.[SUP][17][/SUP] None of the documents were independently authenticated.[SUP][61]

[/SUP]

Commander of Awesome;1658663 wrote:LMFAO, you're seriously trying to use the HEARTLAND institute as your backup? The same org that worked with Tobacco to try and disproveon the dangers of smoking?

"In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks to secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health reforms. "

That organization is funded by energy companies, it's a total joke non respected organization. jmog, for the love of God, put some of this BS you're reading through a BS filter.

LMFAO, talk about an LOLFAIL:

In February 2012, environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, obtained internal Heartland Institute documents by deceptive means, and divulged them, together with an additional document that he later claimed to have received from an unknown source, to public websites.[SUP][58][/SUP] The documents contained the 2012 Heartland budget, a fundraising plan and board materials.[SUP][59][/SUP] The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute – including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts. Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments.[SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also indicated that the institute planned to provide materials to teachers in the United States to undercut the teaching of global warming in schools.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also appeared to disclose Heartland's plans for "Operation Angry Badger", in which $612,000 was to be allocated for activities related to Wisconsin's recall elections.[SUP][17][/SUP] None of the documents were independently authenticated.[SUP][61]

[/SUP]

The link to both studies used to create the "98%" meme are referenced in the Heartland piece. A simple click-though and review of the numbers reveals no inaccuracies on the part of Mr. Best. In fact, his illustration of the methodology of Doran/Zimmerman is pretty much spot on.

I honestly thought you were better at this. Color the day lost when you don't learn something new, I suppose.

Cool rant, nonetheless.

So COA is a hippie liberal environmentalist gay who likes craft beer and is a ginger...The definition of hipster douche

I bet he wears crocs.

I bet he says LMFAOFAIL in real life while debating this at starbucks

fish82;1658668 wrote:The link to both studies used to create the "98%" meme are referenced in the Heartland piece. A simple click-though and review of the numbers reveals no inaccuracies on the part of Mr. Best. In fact, his illustration of the methodology of Doran/Zimmerman is pretty much spot on.

The funniest part is I make a post about getting your science and facts from untrained bloggers and reporters, and he posts articles from Slate immediately after. To make it worse - almost as if he's trying to make me laugh - the Slate author is an Astronomer, which dovetails nicely with me calling it all "climate astrology".

Then I post about how this climate astrology junk science reminds me of the ETS scam, and right on cue....

And for the record, I'm aware of ONE second-hand smoke study that showed a statistically significant elevated risk at levels the FDA routinely uses as an efficacy hurdle in approving drugs.

sleeper;1504676 wrote:Look, I believe gut touched on this briefly but I'll make it more clear. My problem with this claim of AGW is that the scientists that are displaying these findings are BIASED towards the result that will garner them more funding(ie. their job). They also likely go into studying climate change because they are emotionally involved when seeing trees chopped down and exhausts from cars polluting the atmosphere. They have no intention of trying to be credible and likely throw out any conclusions that don't drive their AGENDA while hiding behind a cloud of PHds from junk science.

Do humans have an impact on the climate? Yes. Is it significant enough to destroy the global economy over? NO. GTFO.

This was post #171. Why are we still discussing this?

Commander of Awesome;1658663 wrote:LMFAO, you're seriously trying to use the HEARTLAND institute as your backup? The same org that worked with Tobacco to try and disproveon the dangers of smoking?

"In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks to secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health reforms. "

That organization is funded by energy companies, it's a total joke non respected organization. jmog, for the love of God, put some of this BS you're reading through a BS filter.

LMFAO, talk about an LOLFAIL:

In February 2012, environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, obtained internal Heartland Institute documents by deceptive means, and divulged them, together with an additional document that he later claimed to have received from an unknown source, to public websites.[SUP][58][/SUP] The documents contained the 2012 Heartland budget, a fundraising plan and board materials.[SUP][59][/SUP] The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute – including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts. Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments.[SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also indicated that the institute planned to provide materials to teachers in the United States to undercut the teaching of global warming in schools.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also appeared to disclose Heartland's plans for "Operation Angry Badger", in which $612,000 was to be allocated for activities related to Wisconsin's recall elections.[SUP][17][/SUP] None of the documents were independently authenticated.[SUP][61]

[/SUP]

Have you actually given any serious thought to this issue? The glaciers retreated from tens of thousands of years ago to millions of years ago, with intermittent advances and retrenchments every 40k-100k years. Humans were not involved in that dramatic climate change (warming) obviously - right? I mean, was Haliburton around in the beginning of the Pliocene-Quaternary glaciation? Or when the last glacial period ended 10,000 years ago? Do you completely disregard billions of years worth of climate information that illustrates beyond any doubt that climate changes significantly over huge spans of time..... long before humans ever roamed the planet? Use some logic for God's sake.

Commander of Awesome;1658663 wrote:LMFAO, you're seriously trying to use the HEARTLAND institute as your backup? The same org that worked with Tobacco to try and disproveon the dangers of smoking?

"In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks to secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health reforms. "

That organization is funded by energy companies, it's a total joke non respected organization. jmog, for the love of God, put some of this BS you're reading through a BS filter.

LMFAO, talk about an LOLFAIL:

In February 2012, environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, obtained internal Heartland Institute documents by deceptive means, and divulged them, together with an additional document that he later claimed to have received from an unknown source, to public websites.[SUP][58][/SUP] The documents contained the 2012 Heartland budget, a fundraising plan and board materials.[SUP][59][/SUP] The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute – including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts. Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments.[SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also indicated that the institute planned to provide materials to teachers in the United States to undercut the teaching of global warming in schools.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] The documents also appeared to disclose Heartland's plans for "Operation Angry Badger", in which $612,000 was to be allocated for activities related to Wisconsin's recall elections.[SUP][17][/SUP] None of the documents were independently authenticated.[SUP][61]

[/SUP]

lol, going full libtard huh?

QuakerOats;1658692 wrote:Have you actually given any serious thought to this issue? The glaciers retreated from tens of thousands of years ago to millions of years ago, with intermittent advances and retrenchments every 40k-100k years. Humans were not involved in that dramatic climate change (warming) obviously - right? I mean, was Haliburton around in the beginning of the Pliocene-Quaternary glaciation? Or when the last glacial period ended 10,000 years ago? Do you completely disregard billions of years worth of climate information that illustrates beyond any doubt that climate changes significantly over huge spans of time..... long before humans ever roamed the planet? Use some logic for God's sake.

But have you taken dinosaur flatulence into account?

gut;1658679 wrote:the Slate author is an Astronomer, which dovetails nicely with me calling it all "climate astrology".

Astronomy and astrology are two different things.

QuakerOats;1658692 wrote:Have you actually given any serious thought to this issue? The glaciers retreated from tens of thousands of years ago to millions of years ago, with intermittent advances and retrenchments every 40k-100k years. Humans were not involved in that dramatic climate change (warming) obviously - right? I mean, was Haliburton around in the beginning of the Pliocene-Quaternary glaciation? Or when the last glacial period ended 10,000 years ago? Do you completely disregard billions of years worth of climate information that illustrates beyond any doubt that climate changes significantly over huge spans of time..... long before humans ever roamed the planet? Use some logic for God's sake.

Its time scale. What you're talking about took place over tens of thousands of years +. Whats happening now is accelerated over 50 yrs.

I hope the next Ice Age comes soon and the glacier extends south to Rte 30 in Ohio.

Commander of Awesome;1658724 wrote:Whats happening now is accelerated over 50 yrs.

Is that before or after we were heading for another ice age? Gotta admit, it's all a little confusing trying to keep up with whether the Earth is warming or cooling. It's like tracking Oprah's weight - she's fat, she's thin, she's fat, she's thin....

gut;1658783 wrote:Is that before or after we were heading for another ice age? Gotta admit, it's all a little confusing trying to keep up with whether the Earth is warming or cooling. It's like tracking Oprah's weight - she's fat, she's thin, she's fat, she's thin....

Funny comment, but its going up. Have you been paying attention?

We and all of our children's childrens children will never have to worry about it but the bastards beyond that are probably fucked...so what?

Tiernan;1658737 wrote:I hope the next Ice Age comes soon and the glacier extends south to Rte 30 in Ohio.

Hell no... My property value will drop...

HelloAgain;1658851 wrote:

Exactly why I posted the link ..... the faulty measuring of temps, the invalid data used as input, and the incorrect models resulting therefrom are all examined and detailed, factually, but you have to dig into it and actually read it to be able to discern, for yourself, what the truth is.

Actually we wouldn't be screwed here. Honestly Ohio would essentially have the climate of Tennessee if trends continued which is really no biggie and increased moisture returns would be great for our lakes

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/humans-have-influence-climate-change-study

"A new report published this week by dozens of scientists confirms what Republican politicians dispute: that human-caused climate change is influencing weather patterns around the world."

Your links are retarded.

iclfan2;1659084 wrote:Your links are retarded.

So you don't like their findings? Can't dispute scientific facts.

Commander of Awesome;1659079 wrote:http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/humans-have-influence-climate-change-study

"A new report published this week by dozens of scientists confirms what Republican politicians dispute: that human-caused climate change is influencing weather patterns around the world."

You really gotta start clicking through and read the actual studies, Sport. It doesn't "confirm" anything, and clearly states as such.

Commander of Awesome;1659086 wrote:So you don't like their findings? Can't dispute scientific facts.

If they were facts this conversation wouldn't exist. You linked an msnbc article that saw absolutely nothing. Except some scientists "believe" blank. Because a couple of schmucks sitting in a room trying to manipulate data is science or facts