Liberals are the true totalitarians.
‘Ve vill haf no dizzent’ ping to Liberal Media Criticism list.
Apparently he has the same attitude towards barbers who aren’t visually impaired.
I’m pretty sure he’s sick and tired of people telling him that he’s full crap. Just a hunch...
Liberals always use exclusionary language to stifle debate.
No one is a “climate denier”.
Yes, the climate changes and everyone knows it. NO, you can’t affect it enough to matter unless you take us back to the Stone Age and we aren’t interested.
Nothing says “This is a cult” like banning any dissent. Dissent is the basis for Science.
Blind faith has no place in science.
violating the liberal’s own ‘fairness doctrine’ is he?
> We’re not going to debate climate change... <
And back to the Dark Ages we go, back to a time where it was forbidden to question establishment thought.
Off with their heads!
The face of Stupid.
When I want to know about Science, I always talk to Journalists who have never passed a class in Chemistry or Physics.
Ahhh, proggie tolerance, inclusion, diversity and multiculturalism on display. Again.
when did “climate Change” go from “human caused” to “human activity is a major cause? “
That’s a huge difference. They can’t their “memes” right....
The main problem is he will ban all discussion of the benefits of warming and increased CO2. Then he will add a bunch of crap like "wavy jet stream" and pretend those are all "settled science". The fact is there is warming, mostly manmade, and it is good. Period.
Since you brung it up, Chuck. Upchuck. Heh, heh. Ahem. Is that cruise ship full of climate scientists that got stuck in the melting Antarctic ice cap in the middle of summer a few years ago still stuck in the melting Antarctice ice cap?
Another item of proof in my conjecture that journalists (and silly talking head types, who are not even as “good” as journalists) are not friends with real science. He’s a dumb*ss.
(And, as an aside bit of entertainment, we could always show that he probably gets to “work” in a limo, lives in a large house/apartment which consumes at least 200% more energy than average, and takes advantage of private jets whenever he can).
So, let’s make that a hypocritical dumb*ss. Or, to shorten: journalist.
Here’s the real question. Which are really the deniers? The cult-like true believers or the skeptics?
The true believers are like the communist party dems. If it does serve the party or its goals; it or they have no value to the collective. How very Stalinist of them.
These nitwit warmists are beyond the pall. I guess it is asking too much of such poltroons that they consider alternative opinions. What mentally reclused losers.
They love citing the '97% of all scientists agree that global warming is real and humans cause it' as their excuse to deny opposing points of view. That statistic was created when two global warming activists sent a bogus 'survey' to ONE organization of scientists. It was basically a spam email survey which said, 'Do you think the climate of Earth is changing' and 'what can we do about it'. Of the 2000 scientists who were part of that group, only about 100 even responded.
All the rest clicked 'delete' and sent it to the junk email folder where it belonged. Of the 100 who responded, only about half even took the survey. The rest recognized it as flawed. Of the 50-odd left, about 97% agreed that 'the climate is changing'. None of them agreed what, if anything, could be 'done about it' since the climate changes by mere reason of it's existence.
So the two wacko activists took a percentage, of a percentage, of a fraction, of ONE group of scientists, and said that '97% of ALL scientists' agreed that 'global warming is real', and they tossed in 'that mankind is responsible for it' to boot. It was a fraud from start to finish.
Giving only one side - the liberal side - is the newest tenet of ‘journalism’...