Climate Crisis Fraud -written by a man who shares the Nobel Prize with Al Gore

[Garden Knowm]

My sources tell me the Earth is in a cooling phase.

fyi - your source is a half eaten moldy peanut between your ears... and we all know it has no credibility... LOL

great visual huh? lol

Try looking beyond ME ME ME ME ME ME, I I I I I I I I ... just try to have a single thought that does not originate with YOU... just try it.. you're right,

In YOUR LITTLE TINY imaginary world, with your SELF CENTERED SOURCE... global warming does not exist.. now just join the rest of us and you can see what we are talking about... it still may not exist... but then at least you will be able to contribute on a level that exceeds a fooking legume.


iloveyou

 

[ccodiane]

Come back for more, eh. You like to hit and run, but your memory is short. I'm faster than you.

 

[Garden Knowm]

You like to hit and run,

funny.. that was the last thing your mom told me too..

 

[ccodiane]

fyi - your source is a half eaten moldy peanut between your ears... and we all know it has no credibility... LOL

lol........? Whatever floats your boat, dunce.

great visual huh? lol

No, not really. Unless you have the imagination of a, a, a, a peanut. hahahahaaha, That is SOOO funny,... right?



Try looking beyond ME ME ME ME ME ME, I I I I I I I I ... just try to have a single thought that does not originate with YOU... just try it.. you're right,

Fa Fa Fa Fa, So So So So So, La La La La La La La........

In YOUR LITTLE TINY imaginary world, with your SELF CENTERED SOURCE... global warming does not exist.. now just join the rest of us and you can see what we are talking about... it still may not exist... but then at least you will be able to contribute on a level that exceeds a fooking legume.

Please, teach me more oh enlightened one. And to think, you consider yourself a "spiritual" person. It doesn't seem to be helping you, you, you, you, to suppress that anger you've got bottled away.


iloveyou

Ipityyou, and your desire to be loved. Pathetic.

 

[ccodiane]

funny.. that was the last thing your mom told me too..

your mom told me too.........

 

[Garden Knowm]

"Please, teach me more oh enlightened one. And to think you, consider yourself a "spiritual" person.

It doesn't seem to be helping you, you, you, you, to suppress that anger you've got bottled away."

And what is your source for this information? lol
your mom?

iloveyou

 

[ccodiane]

"Please, teach me more oh enlightened one. And to think you, consider yourself a "spiritual" person.

It doesn't seem to be helping you, you, you, you, to suppress that anger you've got bottled away."

And what is your source for this information? lol
your mom?

iloveyou

No, your mom.

 

[ccodiane]

Oh yeah, Ipityyou.

 

[Garden Knowm]

I think of myself more as a bee keeper.. rather than a spiritual person... every once in awhile i like to blow smoke up your arse... it seems to give you the refreshing breeze your hive needs...

tell your mom i'll be by tonight....




with the gang...









and the camera

 

[Garden Knowm]

oh yeah,

iloveyourmom

 

[ccodiane]

Questions the people pushing this debate are refusing to answer:

4) May I see your best scientific study please?

How about this source. Its' credentials should satisfy your "scientific" criteria.

Garden-no-man-"global warming does not exist.. now just join the rest of us and you can see what we are talking about..."

 

[Garden Knowm]

oh.... ok.. thanks.. you win...

 

[ccodiane]

I think of myself more as a bee keeper.. rather than a spiritual person... every once in awhile i like to blow smoke up your arse... it seems to give you the refreshing breeze your hive needs...

tell your mom i'll be by tonight....




with the gang...









and the camera

Thanks............ She could use the excitement. Keeps telling me about this little pricked, arrogant without cause, fool she's been banging. A bee keeper or some shit.

 

[ccodiane]

oh yeah,

iloveyourmom

Ilovetheopportunitytoraiseyourbloodpressure...

 

[ccodiane]

oh.... ok.. thanks.. you win...

Me me me me me me me me me

 

[Garden Knowm]

Ilovetheopportunitytoraiseyourbloodpressure...

111/66 - Although.. i must say, that last week when you said something about "getting upi in my face"... that really got my preassure boiling to about 114/71..

iloveyourmombutnotthewayshesmells it must have really traumatized you when you were born.

Oh, I hope I am not ruining your sources credibility regarding "being a spiritual man"

iloveyou

 

[may]

Closet.Cult. Sorry for the long delay. I just don’t have the time for this kind of thing, but I promised that I’d read your article and that I would respond. So I’m basically doing this as a courtesy to you because I asked you to submit your claims and you did just that… so if I had ignored your post it would have been a real slap in the face, and I don’t intend to do that to another member of the community.

You demanded! he come up with it for your use so you using it could hardly be seen as a courtesy to him, thats just stupid spin on your part.

With that said I’ll probably find the time to discuss your next response, but then I’ll let it die because I lost interest as I was rather underwhelmed by your article.

I wonder if you were as underwhelmed as I have been by your posts, your showing a true lack of the understanding of history while seemingly thinking that you do?

So please don’t interpret my silence as dismissive, and I do promise to read your response. Here we go…

Firstly I asked for a peer reviewed study so as to review your best scientific study and the corresponding published evaluation from experts in the field whom are chosen by the publisher.

Me I wonder why you didn't ask for a double or a single blind study as you have stated the importance of this.

Instead I got an article arguing against the man-made CO2 emissions global mean temperature debate with corresponding scientific studies… The article was written by a partisan hack, but whatever... The rub however is that I am now forced to choose the best studies for you. I doubt you have the time to read a review of all 22 studies any more than I have the time to type it, so I’ll just pick the first study… The study that he uses for his basic thesis and investigate it.

Maybe he should be put on the rack for not doing what you demanded or for overdoing, I'm sure this has caused you undue stress.

So here’s your article’s first argument, then the referenced scientific study compendium, then the peer reviews, then and the articles conclusion:

From the ‘New Peer Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears.” By none other than Swift Boat Veteran’s For Truth corroborator Marc Morano. (Thanks for that find by the way Medicine Man.)

Argument No 1: A new “peer-reviewed study overturned “in one fell swoop” the climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore.”

Well the UN has seldom been right about anything. But gore invented the internet so it would hard not to believe whatever he says

Study S07 Compendium No 1: Firstly, and I shit you not the researcher/author openly admits in the introduction that it is widely accepted scientific consensus that doubling of CO2 will result in a 2-4.5 C GMT rise. Then thru a bunch of calcs that I won’t pretend to understand concludes “the widely accepted values for temperature increase associated with a doubling of CO2 were far too high i.e. 2 – 4.5 Kelvin.” This value is more likely 1.1 +/- 0.5K.

Peer Review No. 1: The peer reviews (and there are many) all basically state the same critiques.

• His model is over simplified because it describes the earth as having a single temperature.

• Yes that would be GMT. This would be the baseline for proving or disproving GW not that anyone knows what the GMT is, but that hasn't stopped people from saying that its changing and how much it is going to change or how much it has changed.
  Do you not find it strange that with the use of GMT by all involved that it would be over simplified in only this case? [/quote]
  
  

  [*]Then a bunch of other shit that I won’t pretend to understand… Something about his model’s “climate time constant” in relation to the “decay rate of an autocorrelation” and how the autocorrelation is estimated as a “function of lag time.” Whatever that means.

  I'm surprised you don't understand and even more so that you admit it. Good for you.

Fuck it. This is just the first review’s Abstract & Conclusion which was incidentally funded by NASA and the Department of Meteorology and Earth System Science Center:

Abstract: “Therefore the combined inaccuracies in this methodology make any estimates derived from it highly unreliable.”

I find this to truely funny as any methodology used to prove GW, mans part in GW or in climate change would have combined inaccuracies that would make any estimates highly unreliable, this is just a simple fact. Understand it or not.[/quote]

And the Conclusion: “We concur with earlier results that the 20th century trends do not strongly constrain sensitivity [eg Gregory et al., 2002; Forest et al., 2006], and we conclude that S07 presents no substantive evidence to challenge the widely-view that climate sensitivity is likely to lie in the range 2-4.5C.” Hmmm. Interesting. Don’t the author’s know that 800 scientists disagree with the 20,000 that do? Surly this is not a consensus… unless of course you intend to interpret the word ‘consensus’ as described in every dictionary ever printed.

I'm not sure where you got the #s from but you saying that only 800 scientists disagree I call bullshit and stupid at that. [/quote]

Incidentally the second aforementioned reference [Forest et al., 2006] is the James Hansen study conducted by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Columbia University Earth Institute, Sigma Space Partners, Inc., Department of Earth Science, University of California that I’ve been referencing. Hansen’s final sentence reads as follows:

“We conclude that global warming of more than 1°C, relative to 2000, will constitute "dangerous" climate change as judged from likely effects on sea level and extermination of species.” The very study Morano uses for his opening thesis admits that this study is the base of consensus among global climatologists… So if we’re going to keep using the word ‘consensus’ could we please get a dictionary and use it accordingly????

Now Morano’s conclusion based on study S07: “[this] new study belies Al Gore’s claim that there is no legitimate scholarly alternative to climate catastrophism.” Sweet! Al Gore is a global climatologist at NASA’s Goddard Space Institute? I had no idea… This is seriously becoming the all time trite ad homonym attack, and I’m beginning to see why the proponents of your argument would rather discuss Al Gore than the science. Furthermore, I find no great irony in that the proponents of this conspiracy theory… yes the proponents who claim to be scientifically minded, would rather turn this into an argument of partisan hacks (Morano & Gore) than debate anything even remotely scientific.

That would be because any conclusion of any consequence doesn't have any scientific proof.

Morano further expands: “…most of the 1.1 degree - about 0.7 degrees - has already occurred since the beginning of the industrial era.” Then explains that since we’ve already seen 60% of S07’s estimated CO2 effect that, and I shit you not, he really says this “In other words, there’s hardly any additional warming ‘in the pipeline’ from previous greenhouse gas emissions.”

Look dumb shit you should get a brain and try to learn to read, Morano said 60% SO7's estimated CO2 effect, that means 40% is left from CO2 and YOU take that and turn it into hardly any additional warming? from previous greenhouse gas emissions? He was limiting what he said to CO2 but YOU added in all other gasses for effect. YOU can't seem type without adding your own spin.

So the man who claims the study, that according to it’s peers is “highly unreliable” due to it’s linear global temperature assumption, has decided to estimate future temperatures by extrapolating exponentially warming global mean temperatures with a two point linear extrapolation.

You seem less and less honest the more I read of you. GMT is linear and please give proof of exponentially warming GMT. Hell just give proof of warming GMT.
All that I have seen from you is you trying to puff up your EGO.[/quote]

I only have one question. Where is Ockham in this debate? If you don’t want to post actual studies, then at least go to any global climate research center (and I’m embarrassed that I have to say this, but one that actually publishes peer reviewed articles rather than devoting it’s time/money to political agendas) and perform the key word search ‘Global Warming CO2.’

You should be embarrassed, maybe Ockham has something you can borrow to use across your trachea that would cut down on your embarrassment.

You and your studies, do you not understand how studies come to be? MONEY!!! without money there wouldn't be any studies. NASA and the military are hand in hand in pushing this GW agenda because THEY want MONEY for duel purpose satellites and other things. As for the others its not that hard to get money for a study that would point to GW but try to get money for a study that would show GMT is cooling or that man is not the cause and you would have one hell of a time geting any. Thats is just the way it is. Though I do find it funny that the left is helping to push the militarys agenda, hell I'm for this myself, and there are a lot of other good things that will come from this, but also a lot of bad.[/quote]

I did just this on NASA’s website and found 825 matches. The first three are as follows:

First:
Title: Global Warming.
Causes: “A majority [see consensus] of climatologists have concluded that human activities are responsible for most of the warming.”

Yes just ask them if they would like more money or less. Do you think you could get a consensus? Global warming= job security [/quote[

Way’s to Limit GW: (1) limit CO2 emissions. (2) carbon sequestration.

Second:
Title: Global Warming on Mars… Okay, only slightly relevant.

For me this could be key in understanding the suns output.

Third:

Title: Research Finds that Earth’s Climate is Approaching ‘Dangerous’ Point
Thesis: “If global emissions of CO2 continue to rise at the rate of the past decade, this research shows that there will be disastrous effects, including rapid sea level rise, increased frequency of droughts and floods…” and harm to “wildlife and plants due to rapidly shifting climate zones.”

I could keep going, but this conspiracy theory is easily debunked by anyone who is truly scientifically minded or even slightly interested in finding untarnished data. I apologize for the condescending tone but this theory is laughable and I’m embarrassed for those pushing such rubbish. I’m equally embarrassed, given what scientists are saying, that no one has the courage to admit the total global cluster fuck… the potential loss of life if the scientific consensus is correct.

Mankind is a total global cluster fuck, without any help.
I'm embarrassed for you for pushing the rubbish you have pushed maybe you should stick to pushing your history theorys your understading is better and you will cause less harm.
A warming climate has alowed man to feed a growing population and there will some problems if it keeps it up but history says that we are in a interglacial cycle of an iceage. Maybe man has kept the ice age at bay. I ask you what type of a cluster fuck would glaciation bring?
As always, warm regards. MAY

 

[ccodiane]

111/66 - Although.. i must say, that last week when you said something about "getting upi in my face"... that really got my preassure boiling to about 114/71..

iloveyourmombutnotthewayshesmells it must have really traumatized you when you were born.

Oh, I hope I am not ruining your sources credibility regarding "being a spiritual man"

iloveyou

Your spiritual like a dog is articulate.....hell....your articulate like a dog is articulate.

Oh, and not only would I get in your face, I'd kick your ass. Probably try to break your arm, then play patty cake with you naked, so you wouldn't hate me after the fact.

 

[ccodiane]

may may may may may may, you you you you you

good job, although for not.

 

[Garden Knowm]

Your spiritual like a dog is articulate.....hell....your articulate like a dog is articulate.

Oh, and not only would I get in your face, I'd kick your ass. Probably try to break your arm, then play patty cake with you naked, so you wouldn't hate me after the fact.

how's your blood pressure?

iloveyourmomandwillcontinuetotreatherlikeadog and nothing less.

I'd love to have a naked tussle with you. And as far as "trying" to break my arm, i recommend you don't "try" mr. articulate.. I recommended you DO IT... the window of opportunity will be small and "trying" will not suffice.

iloveyou