7 ways to shut down a climate change denier [contraians, skeptics]

Salon ^ | December 18, 2013 | John Rennie, Scientific American

[LibLieSlayer]

Looks like a love candidate for janet elrenio.

[Organic Panic]

In my short time on this earth I have been through...

Global cooling and the coming of the new ice age that will kill billions of people because of hair spray

We will all die from no ozone layer

Global warming will destroy life on the planet and we’re al gonna die

Then that was upgraded to catastrophic global warming that would kill us all

Then upgraded even further to catastrophic global climate change that will kill us all

Then upgraded even further to catastrophic global climate disruption leading to massive climate refugees and we’re all gonna die.

All these of course require higher taxes, limited liberty, and more government control.

[no-s]

If there were a massive conspiracy to defraud the world on climate (and to what end?), surely the thousands of e-mails and other files stolen from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and distributed by hackers on November 20 would bear proof of it. So far, however, none has emerged. Most of the few statements that critics claim as evidence of malfeasance seem to have more innocent explanations that make sense in the context of scientists conversing privately and informally. It is deplorable if any of the scientists involved did prove to manipulate data dishonestly or thwart Freedom of Information requests; however, it is currently unclear whether that ultimately happened. What is missing is any clear indication of a widespread attempt to falsify and coordinate findings on a scale that could hold together a global cabal or significantly distort the record on climate change.

This statement is complete balderdash. I have the Hadley CRU data dumps, it's full of all sorts of damning evidence of fabrication. For example the hockey stick comes from a series of unattributed coefficients in an "R" script, the implicit attribution is an email message discussing ways to make the graph more effective at getting grant money. Also the conspiracy to suppress criticism by engineering the peer reviews is very plain. Also the suppression of hundreds of Siberian tree ring cores to cherry pick one that supports the thesis is documented. Last I heard the original records of historic British temperature data were tossed, there was no independent review, and thus the information is no better evidence than a reconstruction based on ice cores or some other inference. This is one of the reasons why the principals were reluctant to provide source data, because they really couldn't back it up...this is discussed in the first Hadley CRU data dump.

[lavaroise]

Indeed, this is a one way death agenda, because if cooling would re ever occure, guess what, no coal plant to fire up anymore.

Secondly a green house full of CO2 never changed temperature if filled woth O2. The real heat exchange occurs with water condensation with far more energy. A minute temperature increase is immediately offset by the vast Oceans’ rising water vapor recondenscing and loosing heat to outer space. It is a natural control mechanism much like the presure release valve or a steam speed controller.

[N. Theknow]

Another argument against global warming/climate change is when someone asks, "Don't you believe in it?"

Answer, "Why, yes! I believe in it just as much as acid rain. OH, Look! That cloud looks like it's falling!"

[lavaroise]

This is all about the definition of pollution. This is why Climate Changists belong to the church of Satan.

Pollution in the Bible is wasted semen, liberal life back stabbing abortions and liberal lifestyles. Life is not pollution. Without a good person the Earth is just a blob of purposeless pollutants. They are trying to blame us for their useless parasitic lives, passing the buck.

[spawn44]

I have one dart they can't spin. CO2 levels have risen and temps. have not. This fag is spewing the same leftist crap that has already been tried and failed. The only one’s clinging to the scam are the beneficiaries of any monies that will flow their way.

[Edward Teach]

I stopped reading at ‘Salon’...

[vpintheak]

I firmly believe in climate change. Who doesn’t? It changes all the time. The fools who believe that humans are to blame for it changing need to be smacked down.

[Democrat_media]

actually the news media ,government and scientists have been screaming “global warming” for the past 30 years. it hasn't been getting warmer so they changed the name of “global warming” to “climate change”. whatever they call it they blame capitalism for destroying the planet .what a coincidence that what these marxist liars hate is what they say is destroying the planet(C02 = capitalism (big oil , autos, cars , coal , power plants).

[Democrat_media]

ask global warming alarmists or democrats ( all democrats believe in man made global warming)

1. why after 30 years of your news media and government scientists screaming global warming ,why has it not got warmer? This year is the coldest i remember. after 30 years of “global warming “ where is the warming?

1. after 300 years of increasing industrialization there has been no warming , no sea level rise(from melting of ice in Antarctica.
2. the sun's solar cycles are quieting which means decades of coming global cooling . this year is the coldest i remember and it;s just the beginning

As it gets colder in the next few years ,it will be fun going on sites all over the internet and pointing it out to news media reporters and other democrats that it is getting colder not warmer.idiot democrats

[Democrat_media]

global warming is a hoax. it's not getting warmer

to liberals/democrats a gas CO2 that is 0.0003 of the atmosphere is more powerful that the Sun in which a million Earths could fit into. i was having a debate with a democrat about global warming. and she actually thought the Sun revolved around the Earth

the reason that gas co2 is demonized is because by demonizing it they can destroy capitalism advance socialism

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

On a more mundane level, the conceit, so we are told, is that CO₂ from fossil fuels is changing the global concentration of the gas - and it is posited that that will cause climate disruption. Suppose that to be true. How do we ameliorate that? It will not suffice to shut down a few - or all - US coal-fired power plants if the US is not the primary user of coal-fired electric power. And it is not - that would be China, which is building dozens of new coal-fired plants as I type. India is also a big, and getting bigger, consumer of coal. And, nuclear power emits no CO₂ at all.

The obvious conclusion, if indeed CO₂ emission is a problem, is that we must convince China to stop using coal, and that China and everyone else should switch to nuclear power. None of which has any appeal at all to the “environmentalist” who is actually merely favors “alternative” (read, expensive and unreliable) energy precisely because it is expensive and unreliable. It is a misanthropic perspective.

[norwaypinesavage]

"The author is from Scientific American"

Scientific American is neigher scientific, nor American.