You and your fellow climate cranks desperately want to make this about politics but physics, biology and chemistry have no politics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_0-gX7aUKk

What I find puzzling is you find one guy and that's supposed to be a credible counter weight to 98% of all climate scientists who disagree.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008...ientists_e.php

Unless Dr. Theon's work is peer review, it's just an opinion.



.

Wasnt that the point of the E Mails. Dont peer review dissent.

And with physics, chemistry, and biology you have experiments that are repeatable and verifyable; not only that their models actually make predictions that come true.

Or as Michael Mann said:

The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't.

Think that made it into any of Mr. Mann's peer reviewed work?

Oddly enough the people you commonly refer to as cranks and sociopaths are the ones pointing to the flaws in the science instead of following the political herd your posted articles fawn over.

It should not be a political issue, but you have done nothing but support the faulty "science" and failed politics in your posts.

It is hard to believe you can post things like "The Nation" article or support the UN proposals with anything like a straight face. No science, but lots of hot air.


"My favorite quote of all those uncovered was from the climate criminal who asked his colleagues what would happen to them if it was discovered that climate change was “mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation,” as much of the evidence shows. He answers his own question: “They’ll kill us probably.”

The fact is they "killed" all of their own credibility by attempting one of the largest public swindles in history. This swindle has nothing to do with science.
For such "smart" guys they really didn't know much about operational security, but like most criminals they didn't think they would get caught.

Again with your double standards. You got your panties in a wad when someone "mocked" you and "disparaged" your integrity, but you call us a bunch of cranks and sociopaths. It is usually the intellectually challenged that resort to name calling when they don't get their way or when someone disagrees with them.

Busboy,

You bring up a couple of interesting points, to which I may return later. One thing that it is essential to realize is that there is not one debate, but several concurrent ones.

The debate to which you refer is, on one level, a strictly scientific one. but it is not "the" debate; rather, it is one of many.

Another debate, about which there is not a consensus, is whether the prescriptions of the various elements of the AGW side of the argument pass the cost/benefit analysis.

Many thoughtful people, including some who think that the Earth's atmosphere is warming and the climate is changing due to human CO2 emissions, think that the AGW solutions will cause a much more immediate and certain catastrophe than will the greenhouse gasses.

WW

WW

Physical facts could not be ignored. In philosophy, or religion, or ethics, or politics, two and two might make five, but when one was designing a gun or an aeroplane they had to make four.
George Orwell

People aren't buying what the alarmists are selling any more.

BBC News - Canada to withdraw from Kyoto Protocol

WW

Not hardly. You shouldn't assume I care what you think about me. I don't.

Let me tell you a story - I was cracking wise once about a denier of the president's birth place in the same way I give climate cranks grief for denying global climate destabilization. Jungle deleted my post and gave me forum demerits for being too political. I crossed the line!

This was after he and Wheeler were having a laugh about me being a watermelon ie green on the outside - red on the inside because, you know, implying someone is a Communist around here apparently isn't all that political.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ha...tml#post810952

You obviously dont understand the term crank. If there any cranks in this debate they are on the same side as the watermelons. See you got cranky when someone "mocked" you. And if you want to equate the word crank with junk, again your side is the one with the faulty models.


But just in case someday one of your models might come true even if they are off by a factor of 100 we should cancel the keystone pipeline cause the Chinese are much better at environmentally refining oil than we are.