Leftie liberal logic

[Howard]

Howard, your claim about 90% of scientists agreeing on man made climate problems (the figure actually used
is 97%) has been so thoroughly debunked and shown to be a sham that anyone today still making that claim is either a liar or completely ignorant and out of touch with reality.  Do some easily done research for a change before posting nonsense.

http://climatechangedispatch.com/97-articles-refuting-the-97-consensus/

I'm just an old dumb ass . How would I know or understand anything to do with atmospheric physics?

[Zillotch]

I'm just an old dumb ass .

ur new handle.... perfect 

[Howard]

ur new handle.... perfect 

Best suggestion I've ever gotten here.
Mods?    Can we make this name change happen?

[markofan]

My statement was about the entire left wing, progressive "global warming" (yeah, now they call it climate change but global warming is what they mean) crowd and I did not imply that Howard was a liar.  He is woefully ill informed which is a bit of a surprise as this subject has been discussed on this board over and over again.  Being ill informed is a nicer way of saying ignorant.  But he is not alone.  If you get your news and views from the main stream media,  you WILL be misinformed on just about everything.

The 97% consensus is just a small part of a much bigger issue.  The goal of the global warming crowd is to completely shut down the use of fossil fuels and go to what they call green or renewable energy, i.e. windmills and solar panels.  One of the goals of many of those pushing these policies is population reduction.  

Our modern and prosperous society here in the west is a direct result of fossil fuel (especially coal fired) generated electricity.  Modern technology can clean up the pollutants and poisonous particulates expelled by the burning of coal.  Today, it's a no-brainer.  CO2 is not a pollutant and plant life on earth would be doing much better and we would have a greener earth if the CO2 levels were much higher.  Forcibly going to solar and wind would deny cheap, affordable electricity to the poorest countries in Africa, Asia and South America which can help lift them out of poverty.  The global warming crowd would deny this life saving energy to these people.

Obama's science czar, John Holdren has been a long time proponent of the global warming scam as well as a proponent of forced abortions and mass sterilization to reduce the population.  This is truly an evil man.  He would have felt right at home in Nazi Germany.

http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/

http://www.cfact.org/2014/05/31/john-holdren-in-his-own-radical-words/

[markofan]

Ontario has been phasing out coal burning power plants to make Ontario citizens healthier.  But all it has done is make them poorer with sky rocketing electricity costs.  The NDP (that's marxist/socialist to you) in Alberta is planning the same.  The plan is to de-industrialize, de-populate, although they won't tell you this.  Remember when Obama said his plans to kill the coal industry would make energy costs skyrocket?  Yes, he actually said that.

[Irongrip400]

My statement was about the entire left wing, progressive "global warming" (yeah, now they call it climate change but global warming is what they mean) crowd and I did not imply that Howard was a liar.  He is woefully ill informed which is a bit of a surprise as this subject has been discussed on this board over and over again.  Being ill informed is a nicer way of saying ignorant.  But he is not alone.  If you get your news and views from the main stream media,  you WILL be misinformed on just about everything.

The 97% consensus is just a small part of a much bigger issue.  The goal of the global warming crowd is to completely shut down the use of fossil fuels and go to what they call green or renewable energy, i.e. windmills and solar panels.  One of the goals of many of those pushing these policies is population reduction.  

Our modern and prosperous society here in the west is a direct result of fossil fuel (especially coal fired) generated electricity.  Modern technology can clean up the pollutants and poisonous particulates expelled by the burning of coal.  Today, it's a no-brainer.  CO2 is not a pollutant and plant life on earth would be doing much better and we would have a greener earth if the CO2 levels were much higher.  Forcibly going to solar and wind would deny cheap, affordable electricity to the poorest countries in Africa, Asia and South America which can help lift them out of poverty.  The global warming crowd would deny this life saving energy to these people.

Obama's science czar, John Holdren has been a long time proponent of the global warming scam as well as a proponent of forced abortions and mass sterilization to reduce the population.  This is truly an evil man.  He would have felt right at home in Nazi Germany.

http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/

http://www.cfact.org/2014/05/31/john-holdren-in-his-own-radical-words/

How does it make the population growth stop to do away with it?  I don't know either way but it seems reasonable that smoke etc is a bad thing in the atmosphere. I don't know that climate change has anything to do with that, or just a phase the earth is going through. I like my Diesel engines and would like to keep them around.

[Zillotch]

Best suggestion I've ever gotten here.
Mods?    Can we make this name change happen?

would be great if we could squeeze 'Dickhead' in there.... how do u feel about - 'DumbAssedDickhead'?

[AbrahamG]

Hicks....hmm. You mean farmers? People who live on acreage, in the outdoors, who know weather? Maybe the reason they aren't worried about it is they see no proof?

They see no proof because they are hicks.  Illiterate, brain dead, bible thumpers.  But the short answer to your question is YES.

Just trying to help.

[Pray_4_War]

They see no proof because they are hicks.  Illiterate, brain dead, bible thumpers.  But the short answer to your question is YES.

Just trying to help.

If the evidence is so irrefutable then perhaps global warming alarmists should consider the possibility they aren't doing a good job making their case to the average American.

Mocking and dismissing people who disagree with you isn't a good way to persuade them.  Nor is trying to manipulate them with fear based catastrophizing.

[Eric2]

They see no proof because they are hicks.  Illiterate, brain dead, bible thumpers.  But the short answer to your question is YES.

Just trying to help.

This is why Trump won. You liberals are stale in your methods. Patriots are tired of being called names by you people. This is the liberal method, that when loosing an argument they call names and label them as racist. The liberals are the single largest group of mean spirited hate/rage filled lunatics in this here good old USA.
Tonight I will proudly set my clocks back 300 years, and clean my rifles/pistols/shotguns. I will raise my flag at sunrise.Tomorrow will be a glorious day.

[SaintAnger]

This is why Trump won. You liberals are stale in your methods. Patriots are tired of being called names by you people. This is the liberal method, that when loosing an argument they call names and label them as racist. The liberals are the single largest group of mean spirited hate/rage filled lunatics in this here good old USA.
Tonight I will proudly set my clocks back 300 years, and clean my rifles/pistols/shotguns. I will raise my flag at sunrise.Tomorrow will be a glorious day.

Enjoy it while it lasts.

[AbrahamG]

If the evidence is so irrefutable then perhaps global warming alarmists should consider the possibility they aren't doing a good job making their case to the average American.

Mocking and dismissing people who disagree with you isn't a good way to persuade them.  Nor is trying to manipulate them with fear based catastrophizing.

We can't go door to door and read it to the dumbfucks.  I read and watch everything.  I want to get as much info as possible and then make my conclusions.  It's the intellectual laziness
of these "hicks" that pisses us off.  If you believe the earth is 6000 years old and God's plan includes catastrophic weather how am I supposed to reason with that?

[Pray_4_War]

We can't go door to door and read it to the dumbfucks.  I read and watch everything.  I want to get as much info as possible and then make my conclusions.  It's the intellectual laziness
of these "hicks" that pisses us off.  If you believe the earth is 6000 years old and God's plan includes catastrophic weather how am I supposed to reason with that?

How can you persuade someone that you despise and don't understand.

You can continue to feel superior to all the stupid "hicks" or you can consider the possibility that there are valid reasons why they think the way they do.

[Eric2]

Enjoy it while it lasts.

I will bet at least 12 years

[Super Natural]

300 years ago was 1717.

Washington was born in 1732.

 

[Super Natural]

...