I think if you substitute “definitely” for “probably”—as the media has done, my statement would be BS. As demonstrated in post 39, however, the statement is accurate. I agree that the media is manipulative, liberal, and completely untrustworthy. But if you can’t face the truth on there being a scientific consensus that human emmissions are probably contributing to climate change—then you are no more intellectually honest than Dan Rather or Bill Maher.
Vostock o truthful one?
You are either dishonest or you are ignorant. There is no consensus.
I will tell you what. Let us do a little experiment. I will take a nice cold beer and shake it up. You on the other hand can take a nice warm beer and shake it up. We will both open them beerhunter style and you tell me who will get soaked.
You can dry yourself afterwards by throwing more virgins into the volcanoe to appease the gods of nature.