Beam me to Planet Gore !
Aren’t these Libtards 100% funded by the government, therefore by us???
Then why isn’t everything discoverable under FOIA ???
And didn’t they “accidentally” delete it all last time someone asked?
No HD data Backup????????
He says the Media are responding, but you don’t see anything in the U.S. MSM other than a brief mention and pooh-poohing it as nothing big.
And your point is?????
The science is done, the data is complete, and can not be refuted!!!
Why are you trying to destroy the Earth and kill off my grandchildren?????
</sarcasm>
Green on the outside; red all the way through!
when the day finally comes we promise to use sustainable bullets
But then there was another side that saw power and profit in this new method to exploit the masses. This is Al Gore and various others whose motivations were apparent to all of us that they derisively called ‘skeptics.’ Academics and politicians proved themselves to be so stupid that they gleefully threw in with obvious falsehoods and questionable standards. These are the kinds of people who should never be allowed to hold any office of public trust for any reason, ever.
How will we ever know if lying climate scientist A, or Democrat politician B, is telling the truth about what happened to a helpless Yorkie on the man’s newfound dog catcher route? We will never know. They have proven that they will lie regardless of consequences as long as it puts something in their pockets. Besides that, honest dog catchers shouldn’t have to compete with these scum.
The “South Park” analysis of this situation will be very interesting.
“Greens to Be Held to Account?”
Never!
Why should they. They’re brilliant, dontcha know?
IMHO
The GOP could and should pledge a thorough public investigation if they take back Congress (ideally chaired by Inhofe although I'm not optimistic about getting him into the majority with just 2010 elections.) They also should promise to disclose whomever, if any, blocks their investigation and on what issues so the public is aware of such going into 2012. If global warming is real it is important and deserves to have its credibility restored (or created, for many like me.) If it is proven to be a fraud then we're talking a lot of money, even by current standards, in current and future subsidies, mandates, tax credits and bureaucracies. The GOP should promise to freeze or suspend, as much of that as is politically possible until after the investigation is complete. If the greenies stonewall they get no pork. If they co-operate AND prove their case then revert to the status quo. If their case is found to be fraudulent then zero as much funding, remove as many mandates, close as many bureaucracies, cancel as many tax breaks whose existence was based on that fraud as possible. The left will scream, but don't let them stand on fraud. The GOP should favor lowering taxes generally, but giving tax breaks just on the basis of fraud is not proper policy. Academia will whine about losing programs and unfinished PhD students. Philosophically it is not in the public interest to award PhDs on fraudulent subjects and if those students or their professors were either too stupid or too corrupt to recognize such fraud then academia is better off without them. Compile a list of whatever fraud based programs the left was able to protect for the 2012 electorate. Some money already spent may be recoverable as criminally fraudulent and should be referred for prosecution, with RICO triple damages where appropriate (?Gore, Soros, etc.) The standard of evidence will be higher there, sadly we'll be left with a fair chunk of national debt from all the (criminally) innocent dupes. Action, or lack thereof, on those criminal referrals should be a suitable 2012 topic.
There is one group of Greens that can and should be held to account sooner, even if the status of global warming can only shown to be uncertain, rather than fully fraudulent. Everyone who ever signed something swearing there was no doubt that global warming was real and a major public danger deserved to be publicly humiliated for that. Their judgement is proven to be worthless and should be derided if ever expressed on any major issue in the future. Those who merely expressed concern over the possibility of global warming, but not certainty regarding it, may be reformable with suitable reeducation and mea culpas.