Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.astronomy > #273108 > unrolled thread

Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming

Back to article view | Back to alt.astronomy

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 06:17 +0200
    Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 01:05 -0400
      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-20 03:08 -0400
      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 17:56 +0200
    Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-20 03:04 -0400
      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 18:13 +0200
        Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-21 00:15 -0400
          Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 19:23 +0200
            Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-22 12:03 -0400
              Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 18:57 +0200
                Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-22 15:09 -0400
                  Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 22:14 +0200
                    Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-22 16:32 -0500
                      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 01:26 +0200
                    Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-23 04:01 -0400
                      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 17:48 +0200
        Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Jed Clampett <jc@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-22 01:40 -0700
          Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 18:16 +0200
            Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Jed Clampett <jc@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-23 12:55 -0700
              Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 01:59 +0200
    Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@alt.astronomy.fart-acceptance> - 2015-08-21 08:31 +0000
      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 19:10 +0200
        Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming МалыШ <oppressed.welly-boot.top@melancholy.yum.yum> - 2015-08-22 07:00 +0000
          Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 20:53 +0200
            Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@alabama.clay.colored.stools> - 2015-08-22 22:31 +0000
              Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 06:17 +0200
                Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Akhen-f-eshef" <two.bit.altar.of.love@floppy.penis.penitentiary> - 2015-08-23 08:19 +0000
                  Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 19:44 +0200
                    Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Jackson Fashshaw-Pofway" <cracked.up.cooze@creaky.peach.fish> - 2015-08-23 23:22 +0000
                      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 04:12 +0200
                        Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Cedric Fenningstone-Chistway" <dried-up.peeper@incomplete.penis.penitentiary> - 2015-08-24 03:03 +0000
                          Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 06:47 +0200
                            Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@alt.christnet.party-girls> - 2015-08-25 04:00 +0000
                              Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 21:21 +0200
                                Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-24 13:23 -0400
      Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-20 18:41 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#273108 — Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

gilber34, in <news:mr2fnr$u94$1@speranza.aioe.org> did thusly
jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On 8/19/2015 12:10 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:

>> New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and
>> could explain 'pause' in global warming

Solar and orbital forcing, the same causes of every other
interglacial and glaciation period throughout earth's history,
explain the 18 year 10 month pause in "global warming" quite
nicely.

Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
levels long before we ever came on the scene.

Anthropogenic CO2 contributes 1 ten millionth of one percent to
temperature forcing, as has been proven mathematically. And given
that the temperature forcing is negatively correlated with CO2
concentration due to the efficient re-emission to space of
infrared by CO2, as CO2 levels rise, temperature drops will
become more severe on the night side of the planet, just as
happens on Mars.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDGgGttVvk4>

>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-08-method-atmospheric-months-decades-global.html

>>> In a new paper published online in Geophysical Research Letters,
>>> Lovejoy shows how to directly harness the atmosphere's elephantine
>>> memory to produce temperature forecasts that are somewhat more
>>> accurate than conventional numerical computer models. This new
>>> method, he says, could help improve notoriously poor seasonal
>>> forecasts, as well as producing better long-term climate
>>> projections.

> so 97% of Climate Scientist Admit they used Flawed Computer Programs to 
> generate Global Worming

No. Climate change whackadoodles lie. *And* they use flawed
computer programs to generate alarmist global warming propaganda.
Message-ID: <8f8bdad9840a40c99b0afe28d0a2055c@dizum.com>

Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
humans are causing global warming

SPNAK! #4
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
=========================================================
The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
caused!".

Where did this 97% figure come from?

When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
University of Queensland.

What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
(not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
science articles.

But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
uncertain."

That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
position that humans are causing the warming."

11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
(3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
"climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.

But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
that hard math eludes them.
=========================================================

>>> Improvement on standard approach
>>> To take advantage of the butterfly effect, Lovejoy's approach treats
>>> the weather as random and uses historical data to force the forecast
>>> to reflect a realistic climate. This allows it to overcome
>>> limitations of the standard approach, in which imperfect
>>> representations of the weather push a computer model to be consistent
>>> with its model climate - rather than with the real climate.

> Admission that Climate Models Fail to be consistant with real Climate.

Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #1: Climate reacts to whatever
forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant
forcing

SPNAK! #1
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not according to a former IPCC lead author.
Message-ID: <71581f83f38e08d06eae2b440227d0ff@dizum.com>
<http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/>
<http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
<http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
=================================================
Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or
so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000
years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental
Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.

Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate
researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back
8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global
temperature changes over the 20th Century.

What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the
temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees
Celsius - higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the
world has warmed over the last century.

"This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change
observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse
gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was
due to natural variations", Lloyd wrote in his study.

But even surface temperature data showed a hiatus in warming for
about 15 years or so. Scientists have offered up dozens of
explanations for why global temperatures have been flat since the
late 1990s. The most prominent explanation is that oceans have
been absorbing most of the "heat" from increased greenhouse gas
emissions, meaning surface temperatures show less warming than
they otherwise would.

=================================================
{NOTE: That's entirely untrue. NASA JPL itself did the research
and determined that ocean temperature at depth had not changed
one iota.

<http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/06oct_abyss/>
<http://iceagenow.info/2014/10/nasa-stumped-deep-oceans-warmed-2005/>
"When scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean
temperature data from 2005 to 2013, they found that "the ocean
abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably",
the space agency announced in a press release on Monday.
=================================================
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The *only* "global warming" is that which resides in those flawed
computer climate models the libtard environmental whackadoodles
keep trying to sell.

>>> The new method also represents an improvement over other statistical
>>> forecasting techniques that exploit only the atmosphere's short-term
>>> memory, Lovejoy asserts.
>>>
>>> Lovejoy's paper uses a simple version of his new method to show that
>>> the so-called pause in global warming since 1998 can be well
>>> explained with the help of historical atmospheric data. He also
>>> concludes that this method proves more accurate over this period than
>>> the standard computer models used, for example, by the International
>>> Panel on Climate Change.

> which is deeply flawed

Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #5: The last decade 2000-2009 was
the hottest on record.

SPNAK! #5
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another blatant lie.
=========================================================
Message-ID: <15ce479ee9f780168fcff750b5b112a8@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <08866ced31c10d3747efb9bf43b3d981@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0b42119ce54a8e54585eabda09d60ae6@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <460825f8b0e76514eae0c7d9ffb79558@dizum.com>
===============================================================
Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
"Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the
tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and
discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We
need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.", writes Peter
Thorne of the UK Met Office, "I also think the science is being
manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes
might not be too clever in the long run", Thorne adds.

<http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.

Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
to for ~17 years:
<http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>

Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
Machine archived it):
<http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
*falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
===============================================================

>>> Lovejoy's model also predicts that if greenhouse gas emissions
>>> continue at the post 2000 rate, there is a 97.5% chance that the
>>> "pause" in global warming will be over before 2020.
>>>
>>> Read more at:
>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-08-method-atmospheric-months-decades-global.html#jCp

"Global warming" or "anthropocentric climate change" or
"anthropogenic climate disruption" or whatever the Klimate
Katastrophe Kooks are calling it now in trying to sell bull shit
as steak is nothing but a politicized scam... even the "climate
scientists" flogging the "global warming" scam know it...
===============================================================
Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
<http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
"I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
public relations problem for us."
 - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the
bag.

The "climate scientists" know an ice age is coming... but their
paymasters are telling them to flog global warming so those
politicians can set up their carbon exchanges. The politicians
will be ground floor investors in those carbon exchanges, which
will increase the cost of living for everyone by hundreds of
billions of dollars per year (remember Obama saying "electricity
rates would necessarily skyrocket"? Yeah. Because the politicians
would force the utilities to line the pockets of the politicians
via the carbon exchange tax, and the utilities would pass that
cost on to the consumers.)... all so those politicians can reap
hundreds of millions of dollars per year in profits selling a
solution that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Anthropogenic global warming is a politicized scam, nothing more.
===============================================================

Message-ID: <b0d12057982df5cafade09fac73454fd@dizum.com>
===============================================================
This is further borne out by the fact that the Antarctic ice
sheet has been adding 49 Gt / year of land ice (and the sea ice
is expanding faster than ever) since 2003, per Nasa's ICEsat,
despite liberal whackadoodles k'laming it's losing ice at an
unprecedented rate:
Message-ID: <b5b82a4693774b84e8c96c06910bfb2e@dizum.com>

This is borne out by the length of the Arctic melting season
declining for the past 5 years, according to sidads.colorado.edu:
http://oi45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.jpg

This is borne out by the fact that the "Annoying Lead Time
Indicator" graph shows temperature trending downward:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/annoying-lead-time-graph/#comment-44336
"Both the Greenland and the Antarctica temperatures are lower
than their peaks. They are generally trending downward overall.
Antarctica in particular lead on the way up, and is lower than
Greenland now. Furthermore, we know that right now ice is
accumulating in Antarctica. Greenland is the tail on the
Antarctic dog... And our W/m2 line is continuing in a decent
downward slope. Harder to see in that Milankovitch Cycles
composite graph. (Inspecting it, I was hoping we were already AT
the bottom. We are not.) So we have a bit more drop in W/m2
before we start back up, and we are below the energy level that
pulls us out of a glacial, once one begins. All in all, this
graph tells me that we are on the knife edge of a drop into a
cold stage and acceleration into a glacial stage, from which we
can not recover. (This is, in some ways, just a confirmation of
the 416 W/m2 or so number from prior plunges – but on a graph
showing that our drop in W/m2 is not yet done dropping.)"

This is borne out by the fact that Alaska has overall cooled by
2.4 F since 2000:
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/forget-global-warming-alaska-headed-ice-age
You'll note that the "global temperatures surge hotter and the
ice-cap crumbles" quote was due to scientists falsifying data.
Observation of these phenomena proves that global temperatures
are falling, and ice caps are adding ice.

This is borne out by the fact that we've had a 90 year *cooling*
trend that the climate change scientists got caught trying to
falsify data to make it appear as though it were a warming trend:
Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>

This is borne out by the fact that there have been 129
climate-related scandals to date, from outright falsification of
data to unintentional data errors that were left intact because
their removal would put truth to the climate change alarmist's
lies:
http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/

Ironically, while a certain astronomical scientist demands
peer-reviewed scientific literature (then ignores it when it is
provided), the IPCC's errors stem primarily from reliance upon
non-peer reviewed sources for their data, making it all too easy
for climate change alarmists to use the IPCC as a platform for
advancing their agenda. Of course, the IPCC has the same agenda,
so those using it for that purpose are never called to account.

And of course, the scientific research that absolutely blows out
of the water the notion that CO2 is the cause of global warming
is the *fact* that CO2 follows solar and orbital-forcing induced
global warming by 600 to 1000 years, as even SkepticalScience.com
admits.
Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>

And of course, the climate change alarmists are loath to remind
anyone that changes in temperature measurement methods was what
introduced errors that led to the IPCC (and hence the US EPA)
declaring anthropogenic global warming in the first place, but
when the necessary corrective factors are applied to the data,
their claim of anthropogenic temperature increases is severely
reduced. That, combined with the observed increase in
stratospheric water vapor content (remember, water vapor is a
*much* larger contributor to greenhouse warming than CO2), wipes
out even more of the IPCC's claim of AGW.:
http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming

In fact, the man who started the 1970's "ice age" scare, and who
was instrumental in advancing the current "global warming" scare,
NASA scientist James Hansen, has said in 1999:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
"Yet in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the
past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases —
in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the 
country."

(You will note that it was none other than James Hansen who later
lied and claimed 1998 to be the warmest year on record.)

Well there you go... one of NASA's own scientists and currently
one of the largest proponents of the AGW scaremongering,
admitting that from 1940 onward to 1999, temperature actually
went down... but he changed his tune after the global warming
scare mongers changed the data so that the heat wave of the
1930's (remember 1934's record breaking heat wave and dust bowl,
anyone?) appeared to be *less* than 1998 temperatures (remember
1998's dust bowl, anyone? No? Hmmm. That's because it was merely
an El Nino year, and the Heat Index was much lower than that in
1934.), thereby making it appear as though anthropogenic global
warming was taking place.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/

Of course, we now know the lack of a warming trend in the US was
due to accurate measurement of temperature, said data being
changed later, whereas other countries (notably Europe) were
fudging the numbers long before US scientists... the US
politicians finally caught onto the game around 2000, and
colluded with the climate scientists to change the US data to
start their own scare-mongering / profit scamming.

So what we've got here is a bunch of scientists led by the nose
because they wanted to continue receiving research grants,
getting caught falsifying data so they could please those giving
them those grants, all driven by corrupt liberal politicians who
were attempting to commit the world's largest-ever con game on
humanity. That falsified data was going to be used by certain
politicians to set up "carbon exchanges" from which they would
have reaped billions of dollars in profits. A secondary purpose
of this politician-led global warming scam is as an instrument of
authority to impose public policy that the politicians know
they'd have no chance of otherwise imposing upon the populace.

Had they believed their own hype, Al Gore wouldn't be living in a
veritable mansion that's 4 times larger than surrounding homes
and which used 12 times more energy than surrounding homes, and
which was only able to lower its energy consumption by 11% after
extensive renovation and "greening". According to Snopes, most
homes used 20% to 30% more electricity during the 2009 summer
than Gore's home... but only because Gore was almost never home,
he was jetting around the world to give speeches, and pumping
more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the next 100
people combined.

So the truth has been revealed, and the con game is collapsing
before their eyes.

And for certain liberal whackadoodle astronomical scientists
who've been 180 degrees out on every single thing they've
k'lamed, it's just one more example of why liberalism is a mental
disease that combines equal parts unquestioning gullibility,
fawning deference to so-called "experts", dismissal of any
evidence that refutes their kooky worldview, and disingenuous
alteration of any evidence they think they can get away with
altering to "prove" their point.

At the rate scientists are going, it wouldn't surprise me if
their credibility were soon less than that of Congresscritters.

SPNAK!

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 391 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#273109

On 08/20/2015 12:17 AM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> gilber34, in <news:mr2fnr$u94$1@speranza.aioe.org> did thusly
> jump head first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On 8/19/2015 12:10 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>>> New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and
>>> could explain 'pause' in global warming

> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
> levels long before we ever came on the scene.

>> so 97% of Climate Scientist Admit they used Flawed Computer Programs to
>> generate Global Worming
>
> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>
> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
> University of Queensland.

STOP RIGHT THERE!

John Cook a "professor"? That's a good one! He's a "fellow" at 
awarmballer propaganda foundation and doesn't even pretend to know 
science. He's a failed cartoonist which is what you'd expect for this 
kind of work. (Ever see HVAC produce any proof of any degree or science 
knowledge?)

http://web.archive.org/web/20060820035503/http://cartoons.sev.com.au/Sev-Space/Fraud-of-the-Rings

John Cook a "professor" That's about as good as saying Sam Wormley is a 
"professor"! Both have identical credibility: none.


-- 
         ___           ___           ___            ___
        /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
       /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
      /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
     /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
    /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
    \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
     \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
      \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
       \_:/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
                      \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273115

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 01:05:57 -0400, benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 08/20/2015 12:17 AM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus  
> wrote:
>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>> gilber34, in <news:mr2fnr$u94$1@speranza.aioe.org> did thusly
>> jump head first into the wood chipper again:
>>
>>> On 8/19/2015 12:10 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>
>>>> New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades,  
>>>> and
>>>> could explain 'pause' in global warming
>
>> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
>> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
>> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
>> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
>> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
>> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
>> levels long before we ever came on the scene.
>
>>> so 97% of Climate Scientist Admit they used Flawed Computer Programs to
>>> generate Global Worming
>>
>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>
>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>> University of Queensland.
>
> STOP RIGHT THERE!
>
> John Cook a "professor"? That's a good one! He's a "fellow" at  
> awarmballer propaganda foundation and doesn't even pretend to know  
> science. He's a failed cartoonist which is what you'd expect for this  
> kind of work. (Ever see HVAC produce any proof of any degree or science  
> knowledge?)

harlow campbell, pete charest, HVAC?  does that guy pretend to be somebody  
else on the usenets?

>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20060820035503/http://cartoons.sev.com.au/Sev-Space/Fraud-of-the-Rings
>
> John Cook a "professor" That's about as good as saying Sam Wormley is a  
> "professor"! Both have identical credibility: none.
>

regardless of my question, your analogy seems legitimate.  ;)

-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

--

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273129

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

benj, in <news:WedBx.50737$pM6.26272@fx15.iad> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:

> On 08/20/2015 12:17 AM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>> gilber34, in <news:mr2fnr$u94$1@speranza.aioe.org> did thusly
>> jump head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> On 8/19/2015 12:10 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:

>>>> New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and
>>>> could explain 'pause' in global warming

>> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
>> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
>> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
>> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
>> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
>> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
>> levels long before we ever came on the scene.

>>> so 97% of Climate Scientist Admit they used Flawed Computer Programs to
>>> generate Global Worming

>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>
>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>> University of Queensland.

> STOP RIGHT THERE!
> 
> John Cook a "professor"? That's a good one! He's a "fellow" at 
> awarmballer propaganda foundation and doesn't even pretend to know 
> science. He's a failed cartoonist which is what you'd expect for this 
> kind of work. (Ever see HVAC produce any proof of any degree or science 
> knowledge?)
> 
> http://web.archive.org/web/20060820035503/http://cartoons.sev.com.au/Sev-Space/Fraud-of-the-Rings
> 
> John Cook a "professor" That's about as good as saying Sam Wormley is a 
> "professor"! Both have identical credibility: none.

Ah, gotcha. So "Perfessur" Cook calling himself a professor is
yet another libtard lie. And we know he's a libtard because he
likes to dress up like a Nazi, if not in reality, at least in
Photoshop:
<http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html>

<http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lbw90JPZq6Q/U3B9roVxLAI/AAAAAAAABJ4/swCjiaMzqFk/s1600/Herr+Cook.gif>

<http://anonymouse.org/cgi-bin/anon-www.cgi/http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8apmfouVO-Y/U3CCBVFmwPI/AAAAAAAABKU/Ci-CsSKCF0g/s1600/Herr+Dana.gif>

<http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/06/skeptcial-science-takes-creepy-to-a-whole-new-level/>

What's funny is this Perfessur Cook is so scared of how history
might view him that he's excluded that populartechnology.net web
page from archive.org... so we'll just quote that entire page
here.

<snicker>

=============================================================
=============================================================
=============================================================
=============================================================
The Truth about Skeptical Science

<http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lbw90JPZq6Q/U3B9roVxLAI/AAAAAAAABJ4/swCjiaMzqFk/s1600/Herr+Cook.gif>
Source: Skeptical Science Forums

Skeptical Science is a climate alarmist website created by a
self-employed cartoonist, John Cook (who apparently pretends to
be a Nazi). It is moderated by zealots who ruthlessly censor any
and all form of dissent from their alarmist position. This way
they can pretend to win arguments, when in reality they have all
been refuted. The abuse and censorship does not pertain to simply
any dissenting commentator there but to highly credentialed and
respected climate scientists as well; Dr. Pielke Sr. has
unsuccessfully attempted to engage in discussions there only to
be childishly taunted and censored, while Dr. Michaels has been
dishonestly quoted and smeared. The irony of the site's
oxymoronic name "Skeptical Science" is that the site is not
skeptical of even the most extreme alarmist positions.

John Cook is now desperately trying to cover up his background
that he was employed as a cartoonist for over a decade with no
prior employment history in academia or climate science.

Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can reveal what his website
originally said,

"I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed
cartoonist" - John Cook, Skeptical Science

---------------
<http://anonymouse.org/cgi-bin/anon-www.cgi/http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YYVrr8BJIj4/U3CA_pKUGjI/AAAAAAAABKE/o8O69K9MHng/s1600/Cook+Cartoonist.gif>
<http://anonymouse.org/cgi-bin/anon-www.cgi/http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y20HAVkDLGI/U3CBOi_mebI/AAAAAAAABKM/04qM-uzbrDs/s1600/Cook+SEV.gif>
---------------

It is very important for Mr. Cook to keep up this facade, as once
people learn of his lack of credentials and scientifically
worthless employment history they are unlikely to take his
website seriously no matter how he desperately pads his resume.
As opposed to the highly credentialed climate scientists his
staff harassed and censored;

Patrick J. Michaels, A.B. Biological Sciences, University of
Chicago (1971); S.M. Biology, University of Chicago (1975); Ph.D.
Ecological Climatology, University of Wisconsin-Madison (1979);
Research and Project Assistant, Center for Climatic Research,
University of Wisconsin (1976-1979); Assistant Professor of
Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1980-1986);
Virginia State Climatologist (1980-2007); President, Central
Virginia Chapter, American Meteorological Society (1986-1987);
Executive Board, American Association of State Climatologists
(1986-1989); Associate Professor of Environmental Sciences,
University of Virginia (1986-1995); President, American
Association of State Climatologists (1987-1988); Chair, Committee
on Applied Climatology, American Meteorological Society
(1988-1999); Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies, Cato
Institute (1992-Present); Visiting Scientist, Marshall Institute
(1996-Present); Member, American Association for the Advancement
of Science; Member, Association of American Geographers; Member,
Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society; Professor of
Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1996-Present);
Contributor and Expert Reviewer, IPCC (1990, 1992, 1995, 2001,
2007)

Roger A. Pielke Sr., B.A. Mathematics, Towson State College
(1968); M.S. Meteorology, Pennsylvania State University (1969);
Ph.D. Meteorology, Pennsylvania State University (1973); Research
Assistant, Pennsylvania State University (1968); National Science
Foundation Trainee, Pennsylvania State University (1968-1971);
Research Meteorologist, Experimental Meteorology Laboratory, NOAA
(1971-1974); Assistant Professor, Department of Environmental
Sciences, University of Virginia (1974-1977); Distinguished
Authorship Award, NOAA (1974); Leroy Meisinger Award, American
Meteorological Society (1977); Associate Professor, Department of
Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1978-1981); Chief
Editor, Monthly Weather Review (1981-1985); Fellow, American
Meteorological Society (1982); Associate Professor of Atmospheric
Science, Colorado State University (1982-1985); Abell New Faculty
Research and Graduate Program Award (1984); Deputy Director,
Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere (1985-1988);
Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University
(1985-2000), Abell Research Faculty Award (1987/1988); Researcher
of the Year, Colorado State University Research Foundation
(1993), Pennsylvania State Centennial Fellow (1996); Alumni of
the Year, Pennsylvania State College of Earth and Mineral
Sciences (1999); Colorado State Climatologist (1999-2006);
Engineering Dean's Council Award, Colorado State University
(2000); Adjunct Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Duke University (2003-2006); Fellow, American
Geophysical Union (2004); Visiting Professor, Department of
Atmospheric Sciences, University of Arizona (2004); Senior
Research Scientist, Cooperative Institute for Research in
Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado-Boulder
(2005-Present); Senior Research Associate, Department of
Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Colorado-Boulder
(2005-Present); Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Science,
Colorado State University (2007-Present)

References:
Refuting 104 Talking Points from Skeptical Science (PDF) (28pgs)
(Lubos Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physics, March 29, 2010)
Skepticalscience – Rewriting History (Shub Niggurath Climate,
October 10, 2011)
Roger Pielke Sr at the SS.com: A dark day in the climate science
debate (Shub Niggurath Climate, September 18, 2011)
Skepticalscience.com quote surgery on Pat Michaels (Shub
Niggurath Climate, January 18, 2012)
My Interactions With Skeptical Science – A Failed Attempt (So
Far) For Constructive Dialog (Roger A. Pielke Sr., September 17,
2011)
Final Comments On My Interaction With Skeptical Science (Roger A.
Pielke Sr., September 21, 2011)
Response To Skeptical Science On A Series Of Weblog Posts (Roger
A. Pielke Sr., October 25, 2011)
A Response to Skeptical Science's "Patrick Michaels: Serial
Deleter of Inconvenient Data" (Patrick J. Michaels, January 17,
2012)


Update 1: In March of 2012, the climate alarmist website
Skeptical Science had their forums "hacked" and the contents
posted online. What was revealed is simply astonishing,

Skeptical Science: The Censorship of Poptech
"The impact of that ban on PopTech was to silence him." -
[Skeptical Science]
Skeptical Science: "Ding dong, the witch is dead"
"Conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart is dead at 43" "Ding
dong, the witch is dead..." - John Hartz [Skeptical Science],
March 2, 2012
Skeptical Science: "[W]e're all a bunch of leftists"
"It's official, we're all a bunch of leftists" - John Cook
[Skeptical Science], August 26, 2011
Skeptical Science: The Partnership with Al Gore
"This morning, had a long skype call with a guy working with Al
Gore's Climate Reality Project. [...] He brought up the
possibility of a partnership. [...] an exciting opportunity and
another vindication of what we're doing" - John Cook [Skeptical
Science], September 27, 2011
Skeptical Science: From Al Gore to Al Jazeera
"Al Jazeera want[s] to feature SkS as the Site of the Week... Am
sending them some info and pics now." - John Cook [Skeptical
Science], September 28, 2011
Skeptical Science: Too Inaccurate for Joe Romm
"Just got this email from Joe Romm: You must do more post
vetting. More errors are creeping into posts and it will start
making people like me wary of using them." - John Cook [Skeptical
Science], December 2, 2011
Skeptical Science: "Drown Them Out" 
"Badgersouth [John Hartz] and I were just discussing the
potential of setting up a coordinated "Crusher Crew" where we
could pull our collective time and knowledge together in order to
pounce on overly vocal deniers on various comments sections of
blogs and news articles." - Rob Honeycutt [Skeptical Science],
February 11, 2011


Update 2: On August 6, 2013, a hidden image folder was found on
the Skeptical Science forums that contained uploaded images of
John Cook and Dana Nuccetelli photoshopped as Nazis.

http://anonymouse.org/cgi-bin/anon-www.cgi/http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8apmfouVO-Y/U3CCBVFmwPI/AAAAAAAABKU/Ci-CsSKCF0g/s1600/Herr+Dana.gif
=============================================================
=============================================================
=============================================================
=============================================================

A "Crusher Crew" LOL
Their "Crusher Crew" ran away from me. LOL

Now, our resident Klimate Katastrophe Kook Kensi Kensington
should be around to perform damage control.

Thanks for the additional information that liberals are insane
because liberalism is a mental illness.

<snicker>

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 392 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273114

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 00:17:47 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> gilber34, in <news:mr2fnr$u94$1@speranza.aioe.org> did thusly
> jump head first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On 8/19/2015 12:10 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>>> New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades,  
>>> and
>>> could explain 'pause' in global warming
>
> Solar and orbital forcing, the same causes of every other
> interglacial and glaciation period throughout earth's history,
> explain the 18 year 10 month pause in "global warming" quite
> nicely.
>
> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
> levels long before we ever came on the scene.

and that's only been happening for about 50 years.  right?

>
> Anthropogenic CO2 contributes 1 ten millionth of one percent to
> temperature forcing, as has been proven mathematically. And given
> that the temperature forcing is negatively correlated with CO2
> concentration due to the efficient re-emission to space of
> infrared by CO2, as CO2 levels rise, temperature drops will
> become more severe on the night side of the planet, just as
> happens on Mars.
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDGgGttVvk4>
>
>>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-08-method-atmospheric-months-decades-global.html
>
>>>> In a new paper published online in Geophysical Research Letters,
>>>> Lovejoy shows how to directly harness the atmosphere's elephantine
>>>> memory to produce temperature forecasts that are somewhat more
>>>> accurate than conventional numerical computer models. This new
>>>> method, he says, could help improve notoriously poor seasonal
>>>> forecasts, as well as producing better long-term climate
>>>> projections.
>
>> so 97% of Climate Scientist Admit they used Flawed Computer Programs to
>> generate Global Worming
>
> No. Climate change whackadoodles lie. *And* they use flawed
> computer programs to generate alarmist global warming propaganda.
> Message-ID: <8f8bdad9840a40c99b0afe28d0a2055c@dizum.com>
>
> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
> humans are causing global warming
>
> SPNAK! #4
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
> =========================================================
> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
> caused!".
>
> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>
> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
> University of Queensland.
>
> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
> science articles.
>
> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
> uncertain."
>
> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
> position that humans are causing the warming."
>
> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>
> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
> that hard math eludes them.
> =========================================================
>
>>>> Improvement on standard approach
>>>> To take advantage of the butterfly effect, Lovejoy's approach treats
>>>> the weather as random and uses historical data to force the forecast
>>>> to reflect a realistic climate. This allows it to overcome
>>>> limitations of the standard approach, in which imperfect
>>>> representations of the weather push a computer model to be consistent
>>>> with its model climate - rather than with the real climate.
>
>> Admission that Climate Models Fail to be consistant with real Climate.
>
> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #1: Climate reacts to whatever
> forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant
> forcing
>
> SPNAK! #1
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Not according to a former IPCC lead author.
> Message-ID: <71581f83f38e08d06eae2b440227d0ff@dizum.com>
> <http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/>
> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
> =================================================
> Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or
> so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000
> years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental
> Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.
>
> Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate
> researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back
> 8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global
> temperature changes over the 20th Century.
>
> What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the
> temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees
> Celsius - higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the
> world has warmed over the last century.
>
> "This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change
> observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse
> gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was
> due to natural variations", Lloyd wrote in his study.
>
> But even surface temperature data showed a hiatus in warming for
> about 15 years or so. Scientists have offered up dozens of
> explanations for why global temperatures have been flat since the
> late 1990s. The most prominent explanation is that oceans have
> been absorbing most of the "heat" from increased greenhouse gas
> emissions, meaning surface temperatures show less warming than
> they otherwise would.
>
> =================================================
> {NOTE: That's entirely untrue. NASA JPL itself did the research
> and determined that ocean temperature at depth had not changed
> one iota.
>
> <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/06oct_abyss/>
> <http://iceagenow.info/2014/10/nasa-stumped-deep-oceans-warmed-2005/>
> "When scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
> Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean
> temperature data from 2005 to 2013, they found that "the ocean
> abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably",
> the space agency announced in a press release on Monday.
> =================================================
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> The *only* "global warming" is that which resides in those flawed
> computer climate models the libtard environmental whackadoodles
> keep trying to sell.
>
>>>> The new method also represents an improvement over other statistical
>>>> forecasting techniques that exploit only the atmosphere's short-term
>>>> memory, Lovejoy asserts.
>>>>
>>>> Lovejoy's paper uses a simple version of his new method to show that
>>>> the so-called pause in global warming since 1998 can be well
>>>> explained with the help of historical atmospheric data. He also
>>>> concludes that this method proves more accurate over this period than
>>>> the standard computer models used, for example, by the International
>>>> Panel on Climate Change.
>
>> which is deeply flawed
>
> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #5: The last decade 2000-2009 was
> the hottest on record.
>
> SPNAK! #5
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Another blatant lie.
> =========================================================
> Message-ID: <15ce479ee9f780168fcff750b5b112a8@dizum.com>
> Message-ID: <08866ced31c10d3747efb9bf43b3d981@dizum.com>
> Message-ID: <0b42119ce54a8e54585eabda09d60ae6@dizum.com>
> Message-ID: <460825f8b0e76514eae0c7d9ffb79558@dizum.com>
> ===============================================================
> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
> "Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the
> tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and
> discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We
> need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.", writes Peter
> Thorne of the UK Met Office, "I also think the science is being
> manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes
> might not be too clever in the long run", Thorne adds.
>
> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>
> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
> to for ~17 years:
> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>
> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
> Machine archived it):
> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
> ===============================================================
>
>>>> Lovejoy's model also predicts that if greenhouse gas emissions
>>>> continue at the post 2000 rate, there is a 97.5% chance that the
>>>> "pause" in global warming will be over before 2020.
>>>>
>>>> Read more at:
>>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-08-method-atmospheric-months-decades-global.html#jCp
>
> "Global warming" or "anthropocentric climate change" or
> "anthropogenic climate disruption" or whatever the Klimate
> Katastrophe Kooks are calling it now in trying to sell bull shit
> as steak is nothing but a politicized scam... even the "climate
> scientists" flogging the "global warming" scam know it...
> ===============================================================
> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
> public relations problem for us."
>  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
> University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the
> bag.
>
> The "climate scientists" know an ice age is coming... but their
> paymasters are telling them to flog global warming so those
> politicians can set up their carbon exchanges. The politicians
> will be ground floor investors in those carbon exchanges, which
> will increase the cost of living for everyone by hundreds of
> billions of dollars per year (remember Obama saying "electricity
> rates would necessarily skyrocket"? Yeah. Because the politicians
> would force the utilities to line the pockets of the politicians
> via the carbon exchange tax, and the utilities would pass that
> cost on to the consumers.)... all so those politicians can reap
> hundreds of millions of dollars per year in profits selling a
> solution that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
> Anthropogenic global warming is a politicized scam, nothing more.
> ===============================================================
>
> Message-ID: <b0d12057982df5cafade09fac73454fd@dizum.com>
> ===============================================================
> This is further borne out by the fact that the Antarctic ice
> sheet has been adding 49 Gt / year of land ice (and the sea ice
> is expanding faster than ever) since 2003, per Nasa's ICEsat,
> despite liberal whackadoodles k'laming it's losing ice at an
> unprecedented rate:
> Message-ID: <b5b82a4693774b84e8c96c06910bfb2e@dizum.com>
>
> This is borne out by the length of the Arctic melting season
> declining for the past 5 years, according to sidads.colorado.edu:
> http://oi45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.jpg
>
> This is borne out by the fact that the "Annoying Lead Time
> Indicator" graph shows temperature trending downward:
> http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/annoying-lead-time-graph/#comment-44336
> "Both the Greenland and the Antarctica temperatures are lower
> than their peaks. They are generally trending downward overall.
> Antarctica in particular lead on the way up, and is lower than
> Greenland now. Furthermore, we know that right now ice is
> accumulating in Antarctica. Greenland is the tail on the
> Antarctic dog... And our W/m2 line is continuing in a decent
> downward slope. Harder to see in that Milankovitch Cycles
> composite graph. (Inspecting it, I was hoping we were already AT
> the bottom. We are not.) So we have a bit more drop in W/m2
> before we start back up, and we are below the energy level that
> pulls us out of a glacial, once one begins. All in all, this
> graph tells me that we are on the knife edge of a drop into a
> cold stage and acceleration into a glacial stage, from which we
> can not recover. (This is, in some ways, just a confirmation of
> the 416 W/m2 or so number from prior plunges – but on a graph
> showing that our drop in W/m2 is not yet done dropping.)"
>
> This is borne out by the fact that Alaska has overall cooled by
> 2.4 F since 2000:
> http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/forget-global-warming-alaska-headed-ice-age
> You'll note that the "global temperatures surge hotter and the
> ice-cap crumbles" quote was due to scientists falsifying data.
> Observation of these phenomena proves that global temperatures
> are falling, and ice caps are adding ice.
>
> This is borne out by the fact that we've had a 90 year *cooling*
> trend that the climate change scientists got caught trying to
> falsify data to make it appear as though it were a warming trend:
> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>
> This is borne out by the fact that there have been 129
> climate-related scandals to date, from outright falsification of
> data to unintentional data errors that were left intact because
> their removal would put truth to the climate change alarmist's
> lies:
> http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/
>
> Ironically, while a certain astronomical scientist demands
> peer-reviewed scientific literature (then ignores it when it is
> provided), the IPCC's errors stem primarily from reliance upon
> non-peer reviewed sources for their data, making it all too easy
> for climate change alarmists to use the IPCC as a platform for
> advancing their agenda. Of course, the IPCC has the same agenda,
> so those using it for that purpose are never called to account.
>
> And of course, the scientific research that absolutely blows out
> of the water the notion that CO2 is the cause of global warming
> is the *fact* that CO2 follows solar and orbital-forcing induced
> global warming by 600 to 1000 years, as even SkepticalScience.com
> admits.
> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>
> And of course, the climate change alarmists are loath to remind
> anyone that changes in temperature measurement methods was what
> introduced errors that led to the IPCC (and hence the US EPA)
> declaring anthropogenic global warming in the first place, but
> when the necessary corrective factors are applied to the data,
> their claim of anthropogenic temperature increases is severely
> reduced. That, combined with the observed increase in
> stratospheric water vapor content (remember, water vapor is a
> *much* larger contributor to greenhouse warming than CO2), wipes
> out even more of the IPCC's claim of AGW.:
> http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming
>
> In fact, the man who started the 1970's "ice age" scare, and who
> was instrumental in advancing the current "global warming" scare,
> NASA scientist James Hansen, has said in 1999:
> http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
> "Yet in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the
> past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases —
> in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the
> country."
>
> (You will note that it was none other than James Hansen who later
> lied and claimed 1998 to be the warmest year on record.)
>
> Well there you go... one of NASA's own scientists and currently
> one of the largest proponents of the AGW scaremongering,
> admitting that from 1940 onward to 1999, temperature actually
> went down... but he changed his tune after the global warming
> scare mongers changed the data so that the heat wave of the
> 1930's (remember 1934's record breaking heat wave and dust bowl,
> anyone?) appeared to be *less* than 1998 temperatures (remember
> 1998's dust bowl, anyone? No? Hmmm. That's because it was merely
> an El Nino year, and the Heat Index was much lower than that in
> 1934.), thereby making it appear as though anthropogenic global
> warming was taking place.
>
> http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA
>
> http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/
>
> Of course, we now know the lack of a warming trend in the US was
> due to accurate measurement of temperature, said data being
> changed later, whereas other countries (notably Europe) were
> fudging the numbers long before US scientists... the US
> politicians finally caught onto the game around 2000, and
> colluded with the climate scientists to change the US data to
> start their own scare-mongering / profit scamming.
>
> So what we've got here is a bunch of scientists led by the nose
> because they wanted to continue receiving research grants,
> getting caught falsifying data so they could please those giving
> them those grants, all driven by corrupt liberal politicians who
> were attempting to commit the world's largest-ever con game on
> humanity. That falsified data was going to be used by certain
> politicians to set up "carbon exchanges" from which they would
> have reaped billions of dollars in profits. A secondary purpose
> of this politician-led global warming scam is as an instrument of
> authority to impose public policy that the politicians know
> they'd have no chance of otherwise imposing upon the populace.
>
> Had they believed their own hype, Al Gore wouldn't be living in a
> veritable mansion that's 4 times larger than surrounding homes
> and which used 12 times more energy than surrounding homes, and
> which was only able to lower its energy consumption by 11% after
> extensive renovation and "greening". According to Snopes, most
> homes used 20% to 30% more electricity during the 2009 summer
> than Gore's home... but only because Gore was almost never home,
> he was jetting around the world to give speeches, and pumping
> more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the next 100
> people combined.
>
> So the truth has been revealed, and the con game is collapsing
> before their eyes.
>
> And for certain liberal whackadoodle astronomical scientists
> who've been 180 degrees out on every single thing they've
> k'lamed, it's just one more example of why liberalism is a mental
> disease that combines equal parts unquestioning gullibility,
> fawning deference to so-called "experts", dismissal of any
> evidence that refutes their kooky worldview, and disingenuous
> alteration of any evidence they think they can get away with
> altering to "prove" their point.
>
> At the rate scientists are going, it wouldn't surprise me if
> their credibility were soon less than that of Congresscritters.
>
> SPNAK!
>


-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

--

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273130

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka 
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop 
Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
<news:op.x3nm91kntm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 00:17:47 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Solar and orbital forcing, the same causes of every other
>> interglacial and glaciation period throughout earth's history,
>> explain the 18 year 10 month pause in "global warming" quite
>> nicely.
>>
>> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
>> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
>> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
>> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
>> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
>> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
>> levels long before we ever came on the scene.

> and that's only been happening for about 50 years.  right?

Solar output in the Ordovician was very nearly what it is today
(0.991 Ordovician, 1 today), yet CO2 concentrations in the
Ordovician were at least 5 times higher than today. And yet the
Ordovician slipped into an ice age that last ~1,000,000 years.

If, as you libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks k'lame, CO2 is a
driver of temperature change, given that CO2 levels are at least
5 times lower today, why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?

And if, as you k'lame, the earth is unable to cope with the tiny
amount of extra CO2 humankind puts into the environment, just how
did it cope through the Ordovician?

Stop being such an environmental Chicken Little dumbshit and wake
up to reality, you moron. Earth's never had it so good under our
stewardship.

<snicker>

>> Anthropogenic CO2 contributes 1 ten millionth of one percent to
>> temperature forcing, as has been proven mathematically. And given
>> that the temperature forcing is negatively correlated with CO2
>> concentration due to the efficient re-emission to space of
>> infrared by CO2, as CO2 levels rise, temperature drops will
>> become more severe on the night side of the planet, just as
>> happens on Mars.
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDGgGttVvk4>

>> No. Climate change whackadoodles lie. *And* they use flawed
>> computer programs to generate alarmist global warming propaganda.
>> Message-ID: <8f8bdad9840a40c99b0afe28d0a2055c@dizum.com>
>>
>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
>> humans are causing global warming
>>
>> SPNAK! #4
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
>> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
>> =========================================================
>> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
>> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
>> caused!".
>>
>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>
>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>> University of Queensland.
>>
>> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
>> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
>> science articles.
>>
>> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
>> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
>> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
>> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
>> uncertain."
>>
>> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
>> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
>> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
>> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
>> position that humans are causing the warming."
>>
>> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
>> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
>> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
>> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
>> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
>> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
>> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>>
>> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
>> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
>> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
>> that hard math eludes them.
>> =========================================================

>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #1: Climate reacts to whatever
>> forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant
>> forcing
>>
>> SPNAK! #1
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Not according to a former IPCC lead author.
>> Message-ID: <71581f83f38e08d06eae2b440227d0ff@dizum.com>
>> <http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/>
>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>> =================================================
>> Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or
>> so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000
>> years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental
>> Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.
>>
>> Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate
>> researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back
>> 8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global
>> temperature changes over the 20th Century.
>>
>> What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the
>> temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees
>> Celsius - higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the
>> world has warmed over the last century.
>>
>> "This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change
>> observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse
>> gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was
>> due to natural variations", Lloyd wrote in his study.
>>
>> But even surface temperature data showed a hiatus in warming for
>> about 15 years or so. Scientists have offered up dozens of
>> explanations for why global temperatures have been flat since the
>> late 1990s. The most prominent explanation is that oceans have
>> been absorbing most of the "heat" from increased greenhouse gas
>> emissions, meaning surface temperatures show less warming than
>> they otherwise would.
>>
>> =================================================
>> {NOTE: That's entirely untrue. NASA JPL itself did the research
>> and determined that ocean temperature at depth had not changed
>> one iota.
>>
>> <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/06oct_abyss/>
>> <http://iceagenow.info/2014/10/nasa-stumped-deep-oceans-warmed-2005/>
>> "When scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
>> Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean
>> temperature data from 2005 to 2013, they found that "the ocean
>> abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably",
>> the space agency announced in a press release on Monday.
>> =================================================
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> The *only* "global warming" is that which resides in those flawed
>> computer climate models the libtard environmental whackadoodles
>> keep trying to sell.

>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #5: The last decade 2000-2009 was
>> the hottest on record.
>>
>> SPNAK! #5
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Another blatant lie.
>> =========================================================
>> Message-ID: <15ce479ee9f780168fcff750b5b112a8@dizum.com>
>> Message-ID: <08866ced31c10d3747efb9bf43b3d981@dizum.com>
>> Message-ID: <0b42119ce54a8e54585eabda09d60ae6@dizum.com>
>> Message-ID: <460825f8b0e76514eae0c7d9ffb79558@dizum.com>
>> ===============================================================
>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>> "Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the
>> tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and
>> discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We
>> need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.", writes Peter
>> Thorne of the UK Met Office, "I also think the science is being
>> manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes
>> might not be too clever in the long run", Thorne adds.
>>
>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>>
>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
>> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
>> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
>> to for ~17 years:
>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>>
>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
>> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
>> Machine archived it):
>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
>> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>> ===============================================================

>> "Global warming" or "anthropocentric climate change" or
>> "anthropogenic climate disruption" or whatever the Klimate
>> Katastrophe Kooks are calling it now in trying to sell bull shit
>> as steak is nothing but a politicized scam... even the "climate
>> scientists" flogging the "global warming" scam know it...
>> ===============================================================
>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
>> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
>> public relations problem for us."
>>  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
>> University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the
>> bag.
>>
>> The "climate scientists" know an ice age is coming... but their
>> paymasters are telling them to flog global warming so those
>> politicians can set up their carbon exchanges. The politicians
>> will be ground floor investors in those carbon exchanges, which
>> will increase the cost of living for everyone by hundreds of
>> billions of dollars per year (remember Obama saying "electricity
>> rates would necessarily skyrocket"? Yeah. Because the politicians
>> would force the utilities to line the pockets of the politicians
>> via the carbon exchange tax, and the utilities would pass that
>> cost on to the consumers.)... all so those politicians can reap
>> hundreds of millions of dollars per year in profits selling a
>> solution that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>> Anthropogenic global warming is a politicized scam, nothing more.
>> ===============================================================
>>
>> Message-ID: <b0d12057982df5cafade09fac73454fd@dizum.com>
>> ===============================================================
>> This is further borne out by the fact that the Antarctic ice
>> sheet has been adding 49 Gt / year of land ice (and the sea ice
>> is expanding faster than ever) since 2003, per Nasa's ICEsat,
>> despite liberal whackadoodles k'laming it's losing ice at an
>> unprecedented rate:
>> Message-ID: <b5b82a4693774b84e8c96c06910bfb2e@dizum.com>
>>
>> This is borne out by the length of the Arctic melting season
>> declining for the past 5 years, according to sidads.colorado.edu:
>> http://oi45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.jpg
>>
>> This is borne out by the fact that the "Annoying Lead Time
>> Indicator" graph shows temperature trending downward:
>> http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/annoying-lead-time-graph/#comment-44336
>> "Both the Greenland and the Antarctica temperatures are lower
>> than their peaks. They are generally trending downward overall.
>> Antarctica in particular lead on the way up, and is lower than
>> Greenland now. Furthermore, we know that right now ice is
>> accumulating in Antarctica. Greenland is the tail on the
>> Antarctic dog... And our W/m2 line is continuing in a decent
>> downward slope. Harder to see in that Milankovitch Cycles
>> composite graph. (Inspecting it, I was hoping we were already AT
>> the bottom. We are not.) So we have a bit more drop in W/m2
>> before we start back up, and we are below the energy level that
>> pulls us out of a glacial, once one begins. All in all, this
>> graph tells me that we are on the knife edge of a drop into a
>> cold stage and acceleration into a glacial stage, from which we
>> can not recover. (This is, in some ways, just a confirmation of
>> the 416 W/m2 or so number from prior plunges – but on a graph
>> showing that our drop in W/m2 is not yet done dropping.)"
>>
>> This is borne out by the fact that Alaska has overall cooled by
>> 2.4 F since 2000:
>> http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/forget-global-warming-alaska-headed-ice-age
>> You'll note that the "global temperatures surge hotter and the
>> ice-cap crumbles" quote was due to scientists falsifying data.
>> Observation of these phenomena proves that global temperatures
>> are falling, and ice caps are adding ice.
>>
>> This is borne out by the fact that we've had a 90 year *cooling*
>> trend that the climate change scientists got caught trying to
>> falsify data to make it appear as though it were a warming trend:
>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>
>> This is borne out by the fact that there have been 129
>> climate-related scandals to date, from outright falsification of
>> data to unintentional data errors that were left intact because
>> their removal would put truth to the climate change alarmist's
>> lies:
>> http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/
>>
>> Ironically, while a certain astronomical scientist demands
>> peer-reviewed scientific literature (then ignores it when it is
>> provided), the IPCC's errors stem primarily from reliance upon
>> non-peer reviewed sources for their data, making it all too easy
>> for climate change alarmists to use the IPCC as a platform for
>> advancing their agenda. Of course, the IPCC has the same agenda,
>> so those using it for that purpose are never called to account.
>>
>> And of course, the scientific research that absolutely blows out
>> of the water the notion that CO2 is the cause of global warming
>> is the *fact* that CO2 follows solar and orbital-forcing induced
>> global warming by 600 to 1000 years, as even SkepticalScience.com
>> admits.
>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>
>> And of course, the climate change alarmists are loath to remind
>> anyone that changes in temperature measurement methods was what
>> introduced errors that led to the IPCC (and hence the US EPA)
>> declaring anthropogenic global warming in the first place, but
>> when the necessary corrective factors are applied to the data,
>> their claim of anthropogenic temperature increases is severely
>> reduced. That, combined with the observed increase in
>> stratospheric water vapor content (remember, water vapor is a
>> *much* larger contributor to greenhouse warming than CO2), wipes
>> out even more of the IPCC's claim of AGW.:
>> http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming
>>
>> In fact, the man who started the 1970's "ice age" scare, and who
>> was instrumental in advancing the current "global warming" scare,
>> NASA scientist James Hansen, has said in 1999:
>> http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
>> "Yet in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the
>> past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases —
>> in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the
>> country."
>>
>> (You will note that it was none other than James Hansen who later
>> lied and claimed 1998 to be the warmest year on record.)
>>
>> Well there you go... one of NASA's own scientists and currently
>> one of the largest proponents of the AGW scaremongering,
>> admitting that from 1940 onward to 1999, temperature actually
>> went down... but he changed his tune after the global warming
>> scare mongers changed the data so that the heat wave of the
>> 1930's (remember 1934's record breaking heat wave and dust bowl,
>> anyone?) appeared to be *less* than 1998 temperatures (remember
>> 1998's dust bowl, anyone? No? Hmmm. That's because it was merely
>> an El Nino year, and the Heat Index was much lower than that in
>> 1934.), thereby making it appear as though anthropogenic global
>> warming was taking place.
>>
>> http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA
>>
>> http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/
>>
>> Of course, we now know the lack of a warming trend in the US was
>> due to accurate measurement of temperature, said data being
>> changed later, whereas other countries (notably Europe) were
>> fudging the numbers long before US scientists... the US
>> politicians finally caught onto the game around 2000, and
>> colluded with the climate scientists to change the US data to
>> start their own scare-mongering / profit scamming.
>>
>> So what we've got here is a bunch of scientists led by the nose
>> because they wanted to continue receiving research grants,
>> getting caught falsifying data so they could please those giving
>> them those grants, all driven by corrupt liberal politicians who
>> were attempting to commit the world's largest-ever con game on
>> humanity. That falsified data was going to be used by certain
>> politicians to set up "carbon exchanges" from which they would
>> have reaped billions of dollars in profits. A secondary purpose
>> of this politician-led global warming scam is as an instrument of
>> authority to impose public policy that the politicians know
>> they'd have no chance of otherwise imposing upon the populace.
>>
>> Had they believed their own hype, Al Gore wouldn't be living in a
>> veritable mansion that's 4 times larger than surrounding homes
>> and which used 12 times more energy than surrounding homes, and
>> which was only able to lower its energy consumption by 11% after
>> extensive renovation and "greening". According to Snopes, most
>> homes used 20% to 30% more electricity during the 2009 summer
>> than Gore's home... but only because Gore was almost never home,
>> he was jetting around the world to give speeches, and pumping
>> more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the next 100
>> people combined.
>>
>> So the truth has been revealed, and the con game is collapsing
>> before their eyes.
>>
>> And for certain liberal whackadoodle astronomical scientists
>> who've been 180 degrees out on every single thing they've
>> k'lamed, it's just one more example of why liberalism is a mental
>> disease that combines equal parts unquestioning gullibility,
>> fawning deference to so-called "experts", dismissal of any
>> evidence that refutes their kooky worldview, and disingenuous
>> alteration of any evidence they think they can get away with
>> altering to "prove" their point.
>>
>> At the rate scientists are going, it wouldn't surprise me if
>> their credibility were soon less than that of Congresscritters.
>>
>> SPNAK!

DildoRider just hates all that truthiness and reality up above...
it hurts his little LibTard brain. LOL

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 392 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273164

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 12:13:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
> <news:op.x3nm91kntm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
> first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 00:17:47 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>>> Solar and orbital forcing, the same causes of every other
>>> interglacial and glaciation period throughout earth's history,
>>> explain the 18 year 10 month pause in "global warming" quite
>>> nicely.
>>>
>>> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
>>> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
>>> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
>>> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
>>> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
>>> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
>>> levels long before we ever came on the scene.
>
>> and that's only been happening for about 50 years.  right?
>
> Solar output in the Ordovician was very nearly what it is today
> (0.991 Ordovician, 1 today), yet CO2 concentrations in the
> Ordovician were at least 5 times higher than today. And yet the
> Ordovician slipped into an ice age that last ~1,000,000 years.
>
> If, as you libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks k'lame, CO2 is a
> driver of temperature change, given that CO2 levels are at least
> 5 times lower today, why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?
>
> And if, as you k'lame, the earth is unable to cope with the tiny
> amount of extra CO2 humankind puts into the environment, just how
> did it cope through the Ordovician?
>
> Stop being such an environmental Chicken Little dumbshit and wake
> up to reality, you moron. Earth's never had it so good under our
> stewardship.
>
> <snicker>
>
>>> Anthropogenic CO2 contributes 1 ten millionth of one percent to
>>> temperature forcing, as has been proven mathematically. And given
>>> that the temperature forcing is negatively correlated with CO2
>>> concentration due to the efficient re-emission to space of
>>> infrared by CO2, as CO2 levels rise, temperature drops will
>>> become more severe on the night side of the planet, just as
>>> happens on Mars.
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDGgGttVvk4>
>
>>> No. Climate change whackadoodles lie. *And* they use flawed
>>> computer programs to generate alarmist global warming propaganda.
>>> Message-ID: <8f8bdad9840a40c99b0afe28d0a2055c@dizum.com>
>>>
>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
>>> humans are causing global warming
>>>
>>> SPNAK! #4
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
>>> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
>>> =========================================================
>>> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
>>> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
>>> caused!".
>>>
>>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>>
>>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>>> University of Queensland.
>>>
>>> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
>>> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
>>> science articles.
>>>
>>> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
>>> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
>>> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
>>> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
>>> uncertain."
>>>
>>> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
>>> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
>>> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
>>> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
>>> position that humans are causing the warming."
>>>
>>> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
>>> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
>>> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
>>> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
>>> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
>>> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
>>> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>>>
>>> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
>>> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
>>> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
>>> that hard math eludes them.
>>> =========================================================
>
>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #1: Climate reacts to whatever
>>> forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant
>>> forcing
>>>
>>> SPNAK! #1
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> Not according to a former IPCC lead author.
>>> Message-ID: <71581f83f38e08d06eae2b440227d0ff@dizum.com>
>>> <http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/>
>>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>>> =================================================
>>> Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or
>>> so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000
>>> years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental
>>> Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.
>>>
>>> Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate
>>> researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back
>>> 8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global
>>> temperature changes over the 20th Century.
>>>
>>> What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the
>>> temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees
>>> Celsius - higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the
>>> world has warmed over the last century.
>>>
>>> "This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change
>>> observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse
>>> gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was
>>> due to natural variations", Lloyd wrote in his study.
>>>
>>> But even surface temperature data showed a hiatus in warming for
>>> about 15 years or so. Scientists have offered up dozens of
>>> explanations for why global temperatures have been flat since the
>>> late 1990s. The most prominent explanation is that oceans have
>>> been absorbing most of the "heat" from increased greenhouse gas
>>> emissions, meaning surface temperatures show less warming than
>>> they otherwise would.
>>>
>>> =================================================
>>> {NOTE: That's entirely untrue. NASA JPL itself did the research
>>> and determined that ocean temperature at depth had not changed
>>> one iota.
>>>
>>> <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/06oct_abyss/>
>>> <http://iceagenow.info/2014/10/nasa-stumped-deep-oceans-warmed-2005/>
>>> "When scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
>>> Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean
>>> temperature data from 2005 to 2013, they found that "the ocean
>>> abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably",
>>> the space agency announced in a press release on Monday.
>>> =================================================
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>
>>> The *only* "global warming" is that which resides in those flawed
>>> computer climate models the libtard environmental whackadoodles
>>> keep trying to sell.
>
>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #5: The last decade 2000-2009 was
>>> the hottest on record.
>>>
>>> SPNAK! #5
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> Another blatant lie.
>>> =========================================================
>>> Message-ID: <15ce479ee9f780168fcff750b5b112a8@dizum.com>
>>> Message-ID: <08866ced31c10d3747efb9bf43b3d981@dizum.com>
>>> Message-ID: <0b42119ce54a8e54585eabda09d60ae6@dizum.com>
>>> Message-ID: <460825f8b0e76514eae0c7d9ffb79558@dizum.com>
>>> ===============================================================
>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>> "Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the
>>> tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and
>>> discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We
>>> need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.", writes Peter
>>> Thorne of the UK Met Office, "I also think the science is being
>>> manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes
>>> might not be too clever in the long run", Thorne adds.
>>>
>>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>>>
>>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
>>> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
>>> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
>>> to for ~17 years:
>>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>>>
>>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
>>> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
>>> Machine archived it):
>>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
>>> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>>> ===============================================================
>
>>> "Global warming" or "anthropocentric climate change" or
>>> "anthropogenic climate disruption" or whatever the Klimate
>>> Katastrophe Kooks are calling it now in trying to sell bull shit
>>> as steak is nothing but a politicized scam... even the "climate
>>> scientists" flogging the "global warming" scam know it...
>>> ===============================================================
>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
>>> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
>>> public relations problem for us."
>>>  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
>>> University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the
>>> bag.
>>>
>>> The "climate scientists" know an ice age is coming... but their
>>> paymasters are telling them to flog global warming so those
>>> politicians can set up their carbon exchanges. The politicians
>>> will be ground floor investors in those carbon exchanges, which
>>> will increase the cost of living for everyone by hundreds of
>>> billions of dollars per year (remember Obama saying "electricity
>>> rates would necessarily skyrocket"? Yeah. Because the politicians
>>> would force the utilities to line the pockets of the politicians
>>> via the carbon exchange tax, and the utilities would pass that
>>> cost on to the consumers.)... all so those politicians can reap
>>> hundreds of millions of dollars per year in profits selling a
>>> solution that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>>> Anthropogenic global warming is a politicized scam, nothing more.
>>> ===============================================================
>>>
>>> Message-ID: <b0d12057982df5cafade09fac73454fd@dizum.com>
>>> ===============================================================
>>> This is further borne out by the fact that the Antarctic ice
>>> sheet has been adding 49 Gt / year of land ice (and the sea ice
>>> is expanding faster than ever) since 2003, per Nasa's ICEsat,
>>> despite liberal whackadoodles k'laming it's losing ice at an
>>> unprecedented rate:
>>> Message-ID: <b5b82a4693774b84e8c96c06910bfb2e@dizum.com>
>>>
>>> This is borne out by the length of the Arctic melting season
>>> declining for the past 5 years, according to sidads.colorado.edu:
>>> http://oi45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.jpg
>>>
>>> This is borne out by the fact that the "Annoying Lead Time
>>> Indicator" graph shows temperature trending downward:
>>> http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/annoying-lead-time-graph/#comment-44336
>>> "Both the Greenland and the Antarctica temperatures are lower
>>> than their peaks. They are generally trending downward overall.
>>> Antarctica in particular lead on the way up, and is lower than
>>> Greenland now. Furthermore, we know that right now ice is
>>> accumulating in Antarctica. Greenland is the tail on the
>>> Antarctic dog... And our W/m2 line is continuing in a decent
>>> downward slope. Harder to see in that Milankovitch Cycles
>>> composite graph. (Inspecting it, I was hoping we were already AT
>>> the bottom. We are not.) So we have a bit more drop in W/m2
>>> before we start back up, and we are below the energy level that
>>> pulls us out of a glacial, once one begins. All in all, this
>>> graph tells me that we are on the knife edge of a drop into a
>>> cold stage and acceleration into a glacial stage, from which we
>>> can not recover. (This is, in some ways, just a confirmation of
>>> the 416 W/m2 or so number from prior plunges – but on a graph
>>> showing that our drop in W/m2 is not yet done dropping.)"
>>>
>>> This is borne out by the fact that Alaska has overall cooled by
>>> 2.4 F since 2000:
>>> http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/forget-global-warming-alaska-headed-ice-age
>>> You'll note that the "global temperatures surge hotter and the
>>> ice-cap crumbles" quote was due to scientists falsifying data.
>>> Observation of these phenomena proves that global temperatures
>>> are falling, and ice caps are adding ice.
>>>
>>> This is borne out by the fact that we've had a 90 year *cooling*
>>> trend that the climate change scientists got caught trying to
>>> falsify data to make it appear as though it were a warming trend:
>>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>>
>>> This is borne out by the fact that there have been 129
>>> climate-related scandals to date, from outright falsification of
>>> data to unintentional data errors that were left intact because
>>> their removal would put truth to the climate change alarmist's
>>> lies:
>>> http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/
>>>
>>> Ironically, while a certain astronomical scientist demands
>>> peer-reviewed scientific literature (then ignores it when it is
>>> provided), the IPCC's errors stem primarily from reliance upon
>>> non-peer reviewed sources for their data, making it all too easy
>>> for climate change alarmists to use the IPCC as a platform for
>>> advancing their agenda. Of course, the IPCC has the same agenda,
>>> so those using it for that purpose are never called to account.
>>>
>>> And of course, the scientific research that absolutely blows out
>>> of the water the notion that CO2 is the cause of global warming
>>> is the *fact* that CO2 follows solar and orbital-forcing induced
>>> global warming by 600 to 1000 years, as even SkepticalScience.com
>>> admits.
>>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>>
>>> And of course, the climate change alarmists are loath to remind
>>> anyone that changes in temperature measurement methods was what
>>> introduced errors that led to the IPCC (and hence the US EPA)
>>> declaring anthropogenic global warming in the first place, but
>>> when the necessary corrective factors are applied to the data,
>>> their claim of anthropogenic temperature increases is severely
>>> reduced. That, combined with the observed increase in
>>> stratospheric water vapor content (remember, water vapor is a
>>> *much* larger contributor to greenhouse warming than CO2), wipes
>>> out even more of the IPCC's claim of AGW.:
>>> http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming
>>>
>>> In fact, the man who started the 1970's "ice age" scare, and who
>>> was instrumental in advancing the current "global warming" scare,
>>> NASA scientist James Hansen, has said in 1999:
>>> http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
>>> "Yet in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the
>>> past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases —
>>> in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the
>>> country."
>>>
>>> (You will note that it was none other than James Hansen who later
>>> lied and claimed 1998 to be the warmest year on record.)
>>>
>>> Well there you go... one of NASA's own scientists and currently
>>> one of the largest proponents of the AGW scaremongering,
>>> admitting that from 1940 onward to 1999, temperature actually
>>> went down... but he changed his tune after the global warming
>>> scare mongers changed the data so that the heat wave of the
>>> 1930's (remember 1934's record breaking heat wave and dust bowl,
>>> anyone?) appeared to be *less* than 1998 temperatures (remember
>>> 1998's dust bowl, anyone? No? Hmmm. That's because it was merely
>>> an El Nino year, and the Heat Index was much lower than that in
>>> 1934.), thereby making it appear as though anthropogenic global
>>> warming was taking place.
>>>
>>> http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA
>>>
>>> http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/
>>>
>>> Of course, we now know the lack of a warming trend in the US was
>>> due to accurate measurement of temperature, said data being
>>> changed later, whereas other countries (notably Europe) were
>>> fudging the numbers long before US scientists... the US
>>> politicians finally caught onto the game around 2000, and
>>> colluded with the climate scientists to change the US data to
>>> start their own scare-mongering / profit scamming.
>>>
>>> So what we've got here is a bunch of scientists led by the nose
>>> because they wanted to continue receiving research grants,
>>> getting caught falsifying data so they could please those giving
>>> them those grants, all driven by corrupt liberal politicians who
>>> were attempting to commit the world's largest-ever con game on
>>> humanity. That falsified data was going to be used by certain
>>> politicians to set up "carbon exchanges" from which they would
>>> have reaped billions of dollars in profits. A secondary purpose
>>> of this politician-led global warming scam is as an instrument of
>>> authority to impose public policy that the politicians know
>>> they'd have no chance of otherwise imposing upon the populace.
>>>
>>> Had they believed their own hype, Al Gore wouldn't be living in a
>>> veritable mansion that's 4 times larger than surrounding homes
>>> and which used 12 times more energy than surrounding homes, and
>>> which was only able to lower its energy consumption by 11% after
>>> extensive renovation and "greening". According to Snopes, most
>>> homes used 20% to 30% more electricity during the 2009 summer
>>> than Gore's home... but only because Gore was almost never home,
>>> he was jetting around the world to give speeches, and pumping
>>> more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the next 100
>>> people combined.
>>>
>>> So the truth has been revealed, and the con game is collapsing
>>> before their eyes.
>>>
>>> And for certain liberal whackadoodle astronomical scientists
>>> who've been 180 degrees out on every single thing they've
>>> k'lamed, it's just one more example of why liberalism is a mental
>>> disease that combines equal parts unquestioning gullibility,
>>> fawning deference to so-called "experts", dismissal of any
>>> evidence that refutes their kooky worldview, and disingenuous
>>> alteration of any evidence they think they can get away with
>>> altering to "prove" their point.
>>>
>>> At the rate scientists are going, it wouldn't surprise me if
>>> their credibility were soon less than that of Congresscritters.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>
> DildoRider just hates all that truthiness and reality up above...
> it hurts his little LibTard brain. LOL
>

only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere since  
the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.  thanks for  
stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an idiot.

ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to have  
enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to cherry-pick what  
you claim is the TRVTH.

-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

--

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273196

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
<news:op.x3o94e2btm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 12:13:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>>>> Solar and orbital forcing, the same causes of every other
>>>> interglacial and glaciation period throughout earth's history,
>>>> explain the 18 year 10 month pause in "global warming" quite
>>>> nicely.
>>>>
>>>> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
>>>> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
>>>> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
>>>> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
>>>> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
>>>> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
>>>> levels long before we ever came on the scene.
>> Solar output in the Ordovician was very nearly what it is today
>> (0.991 Ordovician, 1 today), yet CO2 concentrations in the
>> Ordovician were at least 5 times higher than today. And yet the
>> Ordovician slipped into an ice age that last ~1,000,000 years.
>>
>> If, as you libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks k'lame, CO2 is a
>> driver of temperature change, given that CO2 levels are at least
>> 5 times lower today, why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?
>>
>> And if, as you k'lame, the earth is unable to cope with the tiny
>> amount of extra CO2 humankind puts into the environment, just how
>> did it cope through the Ordovician?
>>
>> Stop being such an environmental Chicken Little dumbshit and wake
>> up to reality, you moron. Earth's never had it so good under our
>> stewardship.
>>
>> <snicker>
>>>> Anthropogenic CO2 contributes 1 ten millionth of one percent to
>>>> temperature forcing, as has been proven mathematically. And given
>>>> that the temperature forcing is negatively correlated with CO2
>>>> concentration due to the efficient re-emission to space of
>>>> infrared by CO2, as CO2 levels rise, temperature drops will
>>>> become more severe on the night side of the planet, just as
>>>> happens on Mars.
>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDGgGttVvk4>
>>>> 
>>>> No. Climate change whackadoodles lie. *And* they use flawed
>>>> computer programs to generate alarmist global warming propaganda.
>>>> Message-ID: <8f8bdad9840a40c99b0afe28d0a2055c@dizum.com>
>>>>
>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
>>>> humans are causing global warming
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK! #4
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
>>>> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
>>>> =========================================================
>>>> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
>>>> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
>>>> caused!".
>>>>
>>>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>>>
>>>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>>>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>>>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>>>> University of Queensland.
>>>>
>>>> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
>>>> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
>>>> science articles.
>>>>
>>>> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
>>>> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
>>>> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
>>>> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
>>>> uncertain."
>>>>
>>>> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
>>>> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
>>>> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
>>>> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
>>>> position that humans are causing the warming."
>>>>
>>>> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
>>>> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
>>>> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
>>>> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
>>>> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
>>>> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
>>>> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>>>>
>>>> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
>>>> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
>>>> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
>>>> that hard math eludes them.
>>>> =========================================================
>>>> 
>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #1: Climate reacts to whatever
>>>> forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant
>>>> forcing
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK! #1
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> Not according to a former IPCC lead author.
>>>> Message-ID: <71581f83f38e08d06eae2b440227d0ff@dizum.com>
>>>> <http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/>
>>>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>>>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>>>> =================================================
>>>> Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or
>>>> so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000
>>>> years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental
>>>> Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.
>>>>
>>>> Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate
>>>> researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back
>>>> 8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global
>>>> temperature changes over the 20th Century.
>>>>
>>>> What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the
>>>> temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees
>>>> Celsius - higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the
>>>> world has warmed over the last century.
>>>>
>>>> "This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change
>>>> observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse
>>>> gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was
>>>> due to natural variations", Lloyd wrote in his study.
>>>>
>>>> But even surface temperature data showed a hiatus in warming for
>>>> about 15 years or so. Scientists have offered up dozens of
>>>> explanations for why global temperatures have been flat since the
>>>> late 1990s. The most prominent explanation is that oceans have
>>>> been absorbing most of the "heat" from increased greenhouse gas
>>>> emissions, meaning surface temperatures show less warming than
>>>> they otherwise would.
>>>> =================================================
>>>> {NOTE: That's entirely untrue. NASA JPL itself did the research
>>>> and determined that ocean temperature at depth had not changed
>>>> one iota.
>>>>
>>>> <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/06oct_abyss/>
>>>> <http://iceagenow.info/2014/10/nasa-stumped-deep-oceans-warmed-2005/>
>>>> "When scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
>>>> Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean
>>>> temperature data from 2005 to 2013, they found that "the ocean
>>>> abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably",
>>>> the space agency announced in a press release on Monday.
>>>> =================================================
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>
>>>> The *only* "global warming" is that which resides in those flawed
>>>> computer climate models the libtard environmental whackadoodles
>>>> keep trying to sell.
>>>> 
>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #5: The last decade 2000-2009 was
>>>> the hottest on record.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK! #5
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> Another blatant lie.
>>>> Message-ID: <15ce479ee9f780168fcff750b5b112a8@dizum.com>
>>>> Message-ID: <08866ced31c10d3747efb9bf43b3d981@dizum.com>
>>>> Message-ID: <0b42119ce54a8e54585eabda09d60ae6@dizum.com>
>>>> Message-ID: <460825f8b0e76514eae0c7d9ffb79558@dizum.com>
>>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>>> "Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the
>>>> tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and
>>>> discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We
>>>> need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.", writes Peter
>>>> Thorne of the UK Met Office, "I also think the science is being
>>>> manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes
>>>> might not be too clever in the long run", Thorne adds.
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>>>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>>>>
>>>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
>>>> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
>>>> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
>>>> to for ~17 years:
>>>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>>>>
>>>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>>>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
>>>> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
>>>> Machine archived it):
>>>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>>>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
>>>> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>> 
>>>> "Global warming" or "anthropocentric climate change" or
>>>> "anthropogenic climate disruption" or whatever the Klimate
>>>> Katastrophe Kooks are calling it now in trying to sell bull shit
>>>> as steak is nothing but a politicized scam... even the "climate
>>>> scientists" flogging the "global warming" scam know it...
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>>>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
>>>> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
>>>> public relations problem for us."
>>>>  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
>>>> University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the
>>>> bag.
>>>>
>>>> The "climate scientists" know an ice age is coming... but their
>>>> paymasters are telling them to flog global warming so those
>>>> politicians can set up their carbon exchanges. The politicians
>>>> will be ground floor investors in those carbon exchanges, which
>>>> will increase the cost of living for everyone by hundreds of
>>>> billions of dollars per year (remember Obama saying "electricity
>>>> rates would necessarily skyrocket"? Yeah. Because the politicians
>>>> would force the utilities to line the pockets of the politicians
>>>> via the carbon exchange tax, and the utilities would pass that
>>>> cost on to the consumers.)... all so those politicians can reap
>>>> hundreds of millions of dollars per year in profits selling a
>>>> solution that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>>>> Anthropogenic global warming is a politicized scam, nothing more.
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>
>>>> Message-ID: <b0d12057982df5cafade09fac73454fd@dizum.com>
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>> This is further borne out by the fact that the Antarctic ice
>>>> sheet has been adding 49 Gt / year of land ice (and the sea ice
>>>> is expanding faster than ever) since 2003, per Nasa's ICEsat,
>>>> despite liberal whackadoodles k'laming it's losing ice at an
>>>> unprecedented rate:
>>>> Message-ID: <b5b82a4693774b84e8c96c06910bfb2e@dizum.com>
>>>>
>>>> This is borne out by the length of the Arctic melting season
>>>> declining for the past 5 years, according to sidads.colorado.edu:
>>>> http://oi45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.jpg
>>>>
>>>> This is borne out by the fact that the "Annoying Lead Time
>>>> Indicator" graph shows temperature trending downward:
>>>> http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/annoying-lead-time-graph/#comment-44336
>>>> "Both the Greenland and the Antarctica temperatures are lower
>>>> than their peaks. They are generally trending downward overall.
>>>> Antarctica in particular lead on the way up, and is lower than
>>>> Greenland now. Furthermore, we know that right now ice is
>>>> accumulating in Antarctica. Greenland is the tail on the
>>>> Antarctic dog... And our W/m2 line is continuing in a decent
>>>> downward slope. Harder to see in that Milankovitch Cycles
>>>> composite graph. (Inspecting it, I was hoping we were already AT
>>>> the bottom. We are not.) So we have a bit more drop in W/m2
>>>> before we start back up, and we are below the energy level that
>>>> pulls us out of a glacial, once one begins. All in all, this
>>>> graph tells me that we are on the knife edge of a drop into a
>>>> cold stage and acceleration into a glacial stage, from which we
>>>> can not recover. (This is, in some ways, just a confirmation of
>>>> the 416 W/m2 or so number from prior plunges – but on a graph
>>>> showing that our drop in W/m2 is not yet done dropping.)"
>>>>
>>>> This is borne out by the fact that Alaska has overall cooled by
>>>> 2.4 F since 2000:
>>>> http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/forget-global-warming-alaska-headed-ice-age
>>>> You'll note that the "global temperatures surge hotter and the
>>>> ice-cap crumbles" quote was due to scientists falsifying data.
>>>> Observation of these phenomena proves that global temperatures
>>>> are falling, and ice caps are adding ice.
>>>>
>>>> This is borne out by the fact that we've had a 90 year *cooling*
>>>> trend that the climate change scientists got caught trying to
>>>> falsify data to make it appear as though it were a warming trend:
>>>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>>>
>>>> This is borne out by the fact that there have been 129
>>>> climate-related scandals to date, from outright falsification of
>>>> data to unintentional data errors that were left intact because
>>>> their removal would put truth to the climate change alarmist's
>>>> lies:
>>>> http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/
>>>>
>>>> Ironically, while a certain astronomical scientist demands
>>>> peer-reviewed scientific literature (then ignores it when it is
>>>> provided), the IPCC's errors stem primarily from reliance upon
>>>> non-peer reviewed sources for their data, making it all too easy
>>>> for climate change alarmists to use the IPCC as a platform for
>>>> advancing their agenda. Of course, the IPCC has the same agenda,
>>>> so those using it for that purpose are never called to account.
>>>>
>>>> And of course, the scientific research that absolutely blows out
>>>> of the water the notion that CO2 is the cause of global warming
>>>> is the *fact* that CO2 follows solar and orbital-forcing induced
>>>> global warming by 600 to 1000 years, as even SkepticalScience.com
>>>> admits.
>>>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>>>
>>>> And of course, the climate change alarmists are loath to remind
>>>> anyone that changes in temperature measurement methods was what
>>>> introduced errors that led to the IPCC (and hence the US EPA)
>>>> declaring anthropogenic global warming in the first place, but
>>>> when the necessary corrective factors are applied to the data,
>>>> their claim of anthropogenic temperature increases is severely
>>>> reduced. That, combined with the observed increase in
>>>> stratospheric water vapor content (remember, water vapor is a
>>>> *much* larger contributor to greenhouse warming than CO2), wipes
>>>> out even more of the IPCC's claim of AGW.:
>>>> http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming
>>>>
>>>> In fact, the man who started the 1970's "ice age" scare, and who
>>>> was instrumental in advancing the current "global warming" scare,
>>>> NASA scientist James Hansen, has said in 1999:
>>>> http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
>>>> "Yet in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the
>>>> past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases —
>>>> in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the
>>>> country."
>>>>
>>>> (You will note that it was none other than James Hansen who later
>>>> lied and claimed 1998 to be the warmest year on record.)
>>>>
>>>> Well there you go... one of NASA's own scientists and currently
>>>> one of the largest proponents of the AGW scaremongering,
>>>> admitting that from 1940 onward to 1999, temperature actually
>>>> went down... but he changed his tune after the global warming
>>>> scare mongers changed the data so that the heat wave of the
>>>> 1930's (remember 1934's record breaking heat wave and dust bowl,
>>>> anyone?) appeared to be *less* than 1998 temperatures (remember
>>>> 1998's dust bowl, anyone? No? Hmmm. That's because it was merely
>>>> an El Nino year, and the Heat Index was much lower than that in
>>>> 1934.), thereby making it appear as though anthropogenic global
>>>> warming was taking place.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA
>>>> http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/
>>>>
>>>> Of course, we now know the lack of a warming trend in the US was
>>>> due to accurate measurement of temperature, said data being
>>>> changed later, whereas other countries (notably Europe) were
>>>> fudging the numbers long before US scientists... the US
>>>> politicians finally caught onto the game around 2000, and
>>>> colluded with the climate scientists to change the US data to
>>>> start their own scare-mongering / profit scamming.
>>>>
>>>> So what we've got here is a bunch of scientists led by the nose
>>>> because they wanted to continue receiving research grants,
>>>> getting caught falsifying data so they could please those giving
>>>> them those grants, all driven by corrupt liberal politicians who
>>>> were attempting to commit the world's largest-ever con game on
>>>> humanity. That falsified data was going to be used by certain
>>>> politicians to set up "carbon exchanges" from which they would
>>>> have reaped billions of dollars in profits. A secondary purpose
>>>> of this politician-led global warming scam is as an instrument of
>>>> authority to impose public policy that the politicians know
>>>> they'd have no chance of otherwise imposing upon the populace.
>>>>
>>>> Had they believed their own hype, Al Gore wouldn't be living in a
>>>> veritable mansion that's 4 times larger than surrounding homes
>>>> and which used 12 times more energy than surrounding homes, and
>>>> which was only able to lower its energy consumption by 11% after
>>>> extensive renovation and "greening". According to Snopes, most
>>>> homes used 20% to 30% more electricity during the 2009 summer
>>>> than Gore's home... but only because Gore was almost never home,
>>>> he was jetting around the world to give speeches, and pumping
>>>> more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the next 100
>>>> people combined.
>>>>
>>>> So the truth has been revealed, and the con game is collapsing
>>>> before their eyes.
>>>>
>>>> And for certain liberal whackadoodle astronomical scientists
>>>> who've been 180 degrees out on every single thing they've
>>>> k'lamed, it's just one more example of why liberalism is a mental
>>>> disease that combines equal parts unquestioning gullibility,
>>>> fawning deference to so-called "experts", dismissal of any
>>>> evidence that refutes their kooky worldview, and disingenuous
>>>> alteration of any evidence they think they can get away with
>>>> altering to "prove" their point.
>>>>
>>>> At the rate scientists are going, it wouldn't surprise me if
>>>> their credibility were soon less than that of Congresscritters.
>> DildoRider just hates all that truthiness and reality up above...
>> it hurts his little LibTard brain. LOL

> only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere since  
> the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.

Hence your libtard party's solution of chemtrails dumping
thousands of tons per year of chemicals into the atmosphere in an
attempt at "global dimming". LOL

Oh, stoooopid libtard didn't know about the libtard envirowhackos
supporting that bit of insanity, did it? LOL

> thanks for stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an idiot.

Projection on your own part and on the part of the party you
support, the murderous thieving mentally-ill liberal Democrat
party, the same party who started the 9/11 truther movement (an
attempt at blaming Republicans for 9/11), slavery, Jim Crow,
eugenics, institutionalized racism, forced sterilizations and
inoculations that render women unable to bear children and which
sickens and kills tens of thousands of kids worldwide (which is
still going on today in many countries... paid for with US
taxpayer money via USAID), and the Klimate Katastrophe Kook
attempted environmental carbon exchange scam. LOL

If you stoooopid fuckwits ever woke up to reality, your heads
would collectively explode, and we'd have a couple grams of brain
matter to clean up. LOL

> ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to have  
> enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to cherry-pick what  
> you claim is the TRVTH.

That you can't handle the truth that the earth will do just fine
either with or without us, as it's done for billions of years, is
noted, EnviroWhackJob.

<snicker>

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 392 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273280

On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:23:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
> <news:op.x3o94e2btm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
> first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 12:13:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>>>>> Solar and orbital forcing, the same causes of every other
>>>>> interglacial and glaciation period throughout earth's history,
>>>>> explain the 18 year 10 month pause in "global warming" quite
>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
>>>>> each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
>>>>> nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
>>>>> only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
>>>>> ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
>>>>> history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
>>>>> levels long before we ever came on the scene.
>>> Solar output in the Ordovician was very nearly what it is today
>>> (0.991 Ordovician, 1 today), yet CO2 concentrations in the
>>> Ordovician were at least 5 times higher than today. And yet the
>>> Ordovician slipped into an ice age that last ~1,000,000 years.
>>>
>>> If, as you libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks k'lame, CO2 is a
>>> driver of temperature change, given that CO2 levels are at least
>>> 5 times lower today, why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?
>>>
>>> And if, as you k'lame, the earth is unable to cope with the tiny
>>> amount of extra CO2 humankind puts into the environment, just how
>>> did it cope through the Ordovician?
>>>
>>> Stop being such an environmental Chicken Little dumbshit and wake
>>> up to reality, you moron. Earth's never had it so good under our
>>> stewardship.
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>>>>> Anthropogenic CO2 contributes 1 ten millionth of one percent to
>>>>> temperature forcing, as has been proven mathematically. And given
>>>>> that the temperature forcing is negatively correlated with CO2
>>>>> concentration due to the efficient re-emission to space of
>>>>> infrared by CO2, as CO2 levels rise, temperature drops will
>>>>> become more severe on the night side of the planet, just as
>>>>> happens on Mars.
>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDGgGttVvk4>
>>>>>
>>>>> No. Climate change whackadoodles lie. *And* they use flawed
>>>>> computer programs to generate alarmist global warming propaganda.
>>>>> Message-ID: <8f8bdad9840a40c99b0afe28d0a2055c@dizum.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
>>>>> humans are causing global warming
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK! #4
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
>>>>> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
>>>>> =========================================================
>>>>> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
>>>>> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
>>>>> caused!".
>>>>>
>>>>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>>>>
>>>>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>>>>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>>>>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>>>>> University of Queensland.
>>>>>
>>>>> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
>>>>> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
>>>>> science articles.
>>>>>
>>>>> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
>>>>> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
>>>>> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
>>>>> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
>>>>> uncertain."
>>>>>
>>>>> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
>>>>> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
>>>>> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
>>>>> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
>>>>> position that humans are causing the warming."
>>>>>
>>>>> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
>>>>> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
>>>>> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
>>>>> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
>>>>> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
>>>>> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
>>>>> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>>>>>
>>>>> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
>>>>> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
>>>>> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
>>>>> that hard math eludes them.
>>>>> =========================================================
>>>>>
>>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #1: Climate reacts to whatever
>>>>> forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant
>>>>> forcing
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK! #1
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> Not according to a former IPCC lead author.
>>>>> Message-ID: <71581f83f38e08d06eae2b440227d0ff@dizum.com>
>>>>> <http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/>
>>>>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>>>>> <http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
>>>>> =================================================
>>>>> Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or
>>>>> so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000
>>>>> years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental
>>>>> Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate
>>>>> researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back
>>>>> 8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global
>>>>> temperature changes over the 20th Century.
>>>>>
>>>>> What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the
>>>>> temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees
>>>>> Celsius - higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the
>>>>> world has warmed over the last century.
>>>>>
>>>>> "This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change
>>>>> observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse
>>>>> gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was
>>>>> due to natural variations", Lloyd wrote in his study.
>>>>>
>>>>> But even surface temperature data showed a hiatus in warming for
>>>>> about 15 years or so. Scientists have offered up dozens of
>>>>> explanations for why global temperatures have been flat since the
>>>>> late 1990s. The most prominent explanation is that oceans have
>>>>> been absorbing most of the "heat" from increased greenhouse gas
>>>>> emissions, meaning surface temperatures show less warming than
>>>>> they otherwise would.
>>>>> =================================================
>>>>> {NOTE: That's entirely untrue. NASA JPL itself did the research
>>>>> and determined that ocean temperature at depth had not changed
>>>>> one iota.
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/06oct_abyss/>
>>>>> <http://iceagenow.info/2014/10/nasa-stumped-deep-oceans-warmed-2005/>
>>>>> "When scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
>>>>> Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean
>>>>> temperature data from 2005 to 2013, they found that "the ocean
>>>>> abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably",
>>>>> the space agency announced in a press release on Monday.
>>>>> =================================================
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>
>>>>> The *only* "global warming" is that which resides in those flawed
>>>>> computer climate models the libtard environmental whackadoodles
>>>>> keep trying to sell.
>>>>>
>>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #5: The last decade 2000-2009 was
>>>>> the hottest on record.
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK! #5
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> Another blatant lie.
>>>>> Message-ID: <15ce479ee9f780168fcff750b5b112a8@dizum.com>
>>>>> Message-ID: <08866ced31c10d3747efb9bf43b3d981@dizum.com>
>>>>> Message-ID: <0b42119ce54a8e54585eabda09d60ae6@dizum.com>
>>>>> Message-ID: <460825f8b0e76514eae0c7d9ffb79558@dizum.com>
>>>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>>>> "Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the
>>>>> tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and
>>>>> discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We
>>>>> need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.", writes Peter
>>>>> Thorne of the UK Met Office, "I also think the science is being
>>>>> manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes
>>>>> might not be too clever in the long run", Thorne adds.
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>>>>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>>>>>
>>>>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
>>>>> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
>>>>> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
>>>>> to for ~17 years:
>>>>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>>>>>
>>>>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>>>>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
>>>>> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
>>>>> Machine archived it):
>>>>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>>>>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
>>>>> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>>
>>>>> "Global warming" or "anthropocentric climate change" or
>>>>> "anthropogenic climate disruption" or whatever the Klimate
>>>>> Katastrophe Kooks are calling it now in trying to sell bull shit
>>>>> as steak is nothing but a politicized scam... even the "climate
>>>>> scientists" flogging the "global warming" scam know it...
>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>>>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>>>>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
>>>>> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
>>>>> public relations problem for us."
>>>>>  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
>>>>> University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the
>>>>> bag.
>>>>>
>>>>> The "climate scientists" know an ice age is coming... but their
>>>>> paymasters are telling them to flog global warming so those
>>>>> politicians can set up their carbon exchanges. The politicians
>>>>> will be ground floor investors in those carbon exchanges, which
>>>>> will increase the cost of living for everyone by hundreds of
>>>>> billions of dollars per year (remember Obama saying "electricity
>>>>> rates would necessarily skyrocket"? Yeah. Because the politicians
>>>>> would force the utilities to line the pockets of the politicians
>>>>> via the carbon exchange tax, and the utilities would pass that
>>>>> cost on to the consumers.)... all so those politicians can reap
>>>>> hundreds of millions of dollars per year in profits selling a
>>>>> solution that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>>>>> Anthropogenic global warming is a politicized scam, nothing more.
>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>>
>>>>> Message-ID: <b0d12057982df5cafade09fac73454fd@dizum.com>
>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>> This is further borne out by the fact that the Antarctic ice
>>>>> sheet has been adding 49 Gt / year of land ice (and the sea ice
>>>>> is expanding faster than ever) since 2003, per Nasa's ICEsat,
>>>>> despite liberal whackadoodles k'laming it's losing ice at an
>>>>> unprecedented rate:
>>>>> Message-ID: <b5b82a4693774b84e8c96c06910bfb2e@dizum.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is borne out by the length of the Arctic melting season
>>>>> declining for the past 5 years, according to sidads.colorado.edu:
>>>>> http://oi45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> This is borne out by the fact that the "Annoying Lead Time
>>>>> Indicator" graph shows temperature trending downward:
>>>>> http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/annoying-lead-time-graph/#comment-44336
>>>>> "Both the Greenland and the Antarctica temperatures are lower
>>>>> than their peaks. They are generally trending downward overall.
>>>>> Antarctica in particular lead on the way up, and is lower than
>>>>> Greenland now. Furthermore, we know that right now ice is
>>>>> accumulating in Antarctica. Greenland is the tail on the
>>>>> Antarctic dog... And our W/m2 line is continuing in a decent
>>>>> downward slope. Harder to see in that Milankovitch Cycles
>>>>> composite graph. (Inspecting it, I was hoping we were already AT
>>>>> the bottom. We are not.) So we have a bit more drop in W/m2
>>>>> before we start back up, and we are below the energy level that
>>>>> pulls us out of a glacial, once one begins. All in all, this
>>>>> graph tells me that we are on the knife edge of a drop into a
>>>>> cold stage and acceleration into a glacial stage, from which we
>>>>> can not recover. (This is, in some ways, just a confirmation of
>>>>> the 416 W/m2 or so number from prior plunges – but  
>>>>> on a graph
>>>>> showing that our drop in W/m2 is not yet done dropping.)"
>>>>>
>>>>> This is borne out by the fact that Alaska has overall cooled by
>>>>> 2.4 F since 2000:
>>>>> http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/forget-global-warming-alaska-headed-ice-age
>>>>> You'll note that the "global temperatures surge hotter and the
>>>>> ice-cap crumbles" quote was due to scientists falsifying data.
>>>>> Observation of these phenomena proves that global temperatures
>>>>> are falling, and ice caps are adding ice.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is borne out by the fact that we've had a 90 year *cooling*
>>>>> trend that the climate change scientists got caught trying to
>>>>> falsify data to make it appear as though it were a warming trend:
>>>>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is borne out by the fact that there have been 129
>>>>> climate-related scandals to date, from outright falsification of
>>>>> data to unintentional data errors that were left intact because
>>>>> their removal would put truth to the climate change alarmist's
>>>>> lies:
>>>>> http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/
>>>>>
>>>>> Ironically, while a certain astronomical scientist demands
>>>>> peer-reviewed scientific literature (then ignores it when it is
>>>>> provided), the IPCC's errors stem primarily from reliance upon
>>>>> non-peer reviewed sources for their data, making it all too easy
>>>>> for climate change alarmists to use the IPCC as a platform for
>>>>> advancing their agenda. Of course, the IPCC has the same agenda,
>>>>> so those using it for that purpose are never called to account.
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course, the scientific research that absolutely blows out
>>>>> of the water the notion that CO2 is the cause of global warming
>>>>> is the *fact* that CO2 follows solar and orbital-forcing induced
>>>>> global warming by 600 to 1000 years, as even SkepticalScience.com
>>>>> admits.
>>>>> Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course, the climate change alarmists are loath to remind
>>>>> anyone that changes in temperature measurement methods was what
>>>>> introduced errors that led to the IPCC (and hence the US EPA)
>>>>> declaring anthropogenic global warming in the first place, but
>>>>> when the necessary corrective factors are applied to the data,
>>>>> their claim of anthropogenic temperature increases is severely
>>>>> reduced. That, combined with the observed increase in
>>>>> stratospheric water vapor content (remember, water vapor is a
>>>>> *much* larger contributor to greenhouse warming than CO2), wipes
>>>>> out even more of the IPCC's claim of AGW.:
>>>>> http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact, the man who started the 1970's "ice age" scare, and who
>>>>> was instrumental in advancing the current "global warming" scare,
>>>>> NASA scientist James Hansen, has said in 1999:
>>>>> http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
>>>>> "Yet in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the
>>>>> past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases  
>>>>> —
>>>>> in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the
>>>>> country."
>>>>>
>>>>> (You will note that it was none other than James Hansen who later
>>>>> lied and claimed 1998 to be the warmest year on record.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Well there you go... one of NASA's own scientists and currently
>>>>> one of the largest proponents of the AGW scaremongering,
>>>>> admitting that from 1940 onward to 1999, temperature actually
>>>>> went down... but he changed his tune after the global warming
>>>>> scare mongers changed the data so that the heat wave of the
>>>>> 1930's (remember 1934's record breaking heat wave and dust bowl,
>>>>> anyone?) appeared to be *less* than 1998 temperatures (remember
>>>>> 1998's dust bowl, anyone? No? Hmmm. That's because it was merely
>>>>> an El Nino year, and the Heat Index was much lower than that in
>>>>> 1934.), thereby making it appear as though anthropogenic global
>>>>> warming was taking place.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA
>>>>> http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, we now know the lack of a warming trend in the US was
>>>>> due to accurate measurement of temperature, said data being
>>>>> changed later, whereas other countries (notably Europe) were
>>>>> fudging the numbers long before US scientists... the US
>>>>> politicians finally caught onto the game around 2000, and
>>>>> colluded with the climate scientists to change the US data to
>>>>> start their own scare-mongering / profit scamming.
>>>>>
>>>>> So what we've got here is a bunch of scientists led by the nose
>>>>> because they wanted to continue receiving research grants,
>>>>> getting caught falsifying data so they could please those giving
>>>>> them those grants, all driven by corrupt liberal politicians who
>>>>> were attempting to commit the world's largest-ever con game on
>>>>> humanity. That falsified data was going to be used by certain
>>>>> politicians to set up "carbon exchanges" from which they would
>>>>> have reaped billions of dollars in profits. A secondary purpose
>>>>> of this politician-led global warming scam is as an instrument of
>>>>> authority to impose public policy that the politicians know
>>>>> they'd have no chance of otherwise imposing upon the populace.
>>>>>
>>>>> Had they believed their own hype, Al Gore wouldn't be living in a
>>>>> veritable mansion that's 4 times larger than surrounding homes
>>>>> and which used 12 times more energy than surrounding homes, and
>>>>> which was only able to lower its energy consumption by 11% after
>>>>> extensive renovation and "greening". According to Snopes, most
>>>>> homes used 20% to 30% more electricity during the 2009 summer
>>>>> than Gore's home... but only because Gore was almost never home,
>>>>> he was jetting around the world to give speeches, and pumping
>>>>> more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the next 100
>>>>> people combined.
>>>>>
>>>>> So the truth has been revealed, and the con game is collapsing
>>>>> before their eyes.
>>>>>
>>>>> And for certain liberal whackadoodle astronomical scientists
>>>>> who've been 180 degrees out on every single thing they've
>>>>> k'lamed, it's just one more example of why liberalism is a mental
>>>>> disease that combines equal parts unquestioning gullibility,
>>>>> fawning deference to so-called "experts", dismissal of any
>>>>> evidence that refutes their kooky worldview, and disingenuous
>>>>> alteration of any evidence they think they can get away with
>>>>> altering to "prove" their point.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the rate scientists are going, it wouldn't surprise me if
>>>>> their credibility were soon less than that of Congresscritters.
>>> DildoRider just hates all that truthiness and reality up above...
>>> it hurts his little LibTard brain. LOL
>
>> only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere  
>> since
>> the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.
>
> Hence your libtard party's solution of chemtrails dumping
> thousands of tons per year of chemicals into the atmosphere in an
> attempt at "global dimming". LOL
>
> Oh, stoooopid libtard didn't know about the libtard envirowhackos
> supporting that bit of insanity, did it? LOL
>
>> thanks for stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an idiot.
>
> Projection on your own part and on the part of the party you
> support, the murderous thieving mentally-ill liberal Democrat
> party, the same party who started the 9/11 truther movement (an
> attempt at blaming Republicans for 9/11), slavery, Jim Crow,
> eugenics, institutionalized racism, forced sterilizations and
> inoculations that render women unable to bear children and which
> sickens and kills tens of thousands of kids worldwide (which is
> still going on today in many countries... paid for with US
> taxpayer money via USAID), and the Klimate Katastrophe Kook
> attempted environmental carbon exchange scam. LOL
>
> If you stoooopid fuckwits ever woke up to reality, your heads
> would collectively explode, and we'd have a couple grams of brain
> matter to clean up. LOL
>
>> ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to have
>> enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to cherry-pick what
>> you claim is the TRVTH.
>
> That you can't handle the truth that the earth will do just fine
> either with or without us, as it's done for billions of years, is
> noted, EnviroWhackJob.
>
> <snicker>
>

it's ironic that you claim to understand science yet atmospheric science  
eludes you.

it's cute that you can just wave your hand on alt.usenet.kooks and ignore  
the sheer weight of all of the toxins, particulates, and waste that our  
civilization dumps into the air and water.  also, that part where you  
think there's some k0oky conspiracy theory explaining why 97% of all  
climate scientists are *certain* that climate change is currently  
predominately driven by the effects of human activity, not sunspots,  
polarity flips, or jebus.

<points and laughs at you>

-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

--

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273288

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
<news:op.x3r1ku0wtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:23:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>>> only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere  
>>> since the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.

>> Hence your libtard party's solution of chemtrails dumping
>> thousands of tons per year of chemicals into the atmosphere in an
>> attempt at "global dimming". LOL

<crickets> LOL

>> Oh, stoooopid libtard didn't know about the libtard envirowhackos
>> supporting that bit of insanity, did it? LOL

>>> thanks for stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an idiot.

>> Projection on your own part and on the part of the party you
>> support, the murderous thieving mentally-ill liberal Democrat
>> party, the same party who started the 9/11 truther movement (an
>> attempt at blaming Republicans for 9/11), slavery, Jim Crow,
>> eugenics, institutionalized racism, forced sterilizations and
>> inoculations that render women unable to bear children and which
>> sickens and kills tens of thousands of kids worldwide (which is
>> still going on today in many countries... paid for with US
>> taxpayer money via USAID), and the Klimate Katastrophe Kook
>> attempted environmental carbon exchange scam. LOL
>>
>> If you stoooopid fuckwits ever woke up to reality, your heads
>> would collectively explode, and we'd have a couple grams of brain
>> matter to clean up. LOL

<crickets> LOL

>>> ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to have
>>> enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to cherry-pick what
>>> you claim is the TRVTH.

>> That you can't handle the truth that the earth will do just fine
>> either with or without us, as it's done for billions of years, is
>> noted, EnviroWhackJob.

> it's ironic that you claim to understand science yet atmospheric science  
> eludes you.

"Atmospheric science" like using a flawed computer climate model
and falsified data to scream out kooky alarmist "zOMG! Globular
Warmings!" while denying the raft of peer-reviewed proof such as
ocean temperatures not changing one iota; Antarctica, Greenland
and the Arctic glaciers adding ice at record levels; global
temperatures decreasing for the past 15 years or so... yeah, you
listen to the retards who have no understand of "atmospheric
science", the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks in the IPCC. LOL

===============================================================
<http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.

Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
to for ~17 years:
<http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>

Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
Machine archived it):
<http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
*falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
===============================================================

Note that the above uses data from the very agencies who are
k'laming "zOMG! Globular Warmings!"... their underlying data
proves otherwise. Global warming is nothing more than a
politicized scam, an attempt by libtard politicians to get carbon
exchanges set up, increase the cost of living for everyone by
hundreds of billions of dollars per year while siphoning off
profits of billions of dollars per year... selling a solution
that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Prove otherwise, KookTard.

<snicker>

> it's cute that you can just wave your hand on alt.usenet.kooks and ignore  
> the sheer weight of all of the toxins, particulates, and waste that our  
> civilization dumps into the air and water.

Is that why the libtards proposed dumping thousands of tons of
toxins, particulates and waste directly into the upper atmosphere
in a retarded attempt at global dimming, Hypocritical Dimmy? LOL

> also, that part where you  
> think there's some k0oky conspiracy theory explaining why 97% of all  
> climate scientists are *certain* that climate change is currently  
> predominately driven by the effects of human activity, not sunspots,  
> polarity flips, or jebus.

LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and stupid...
they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass long enough
to do their own research, and even if they could, that hard math
eludes them. LOL

Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
humans are causing global warming

SPNAK! #4
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
=========================================================
The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
caused!".

Where did this 97% figure come from?

When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
University of Queensland.

What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
(not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
science articles.

But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
uncertain."

That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
position that humans are causing the warming."

11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
(3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
"climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.

But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
that hard math eludes them.
=========================================================

If poking holes in your kooky worldview is as simple as pointing
out your conceptual and mathematical errors, your worldview is
false. Take this to heart... your belief in a false worldview
classifies you as delusional at best, most likely insane.

<snicker>

> <points and laughs at you>

He says, standing in front of a mirror and projecting. LOL

The "zOMG! Globular Warmings!" scam is done. The lie has been
exposed, no one believes the libtard bullshit anymore... not even
the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks flogging the alarmist bullshit:

===============================================================
Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
<http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
"I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
public relations problem for us."
- Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked University
of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
===============================================================

Kook.

<snicker>

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 394 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273299

On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 12:57:28 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
> <news:op.x3r1ku0wtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
> first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:23:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>>>> only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere
>>>> since the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.
>
>>> Hence your libtard party's solution of chemtrails dumping
>>> thousands of tons per year of chemicals into the atmosphere in an
>>> attempt at "global dimming". LOL
>
> <crickets> LOL
>
>>> Oh, stoooopid libtard didn't know about the libtard envirowhackos
>>> supporting that bit of insanity, did it? LOL
>
>>>> thanks for stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an  
>>>> idiot.
>
>>> Projection on your own part and on the part of the party you
>>> support, the murderous thieving mentally-ill liberal Democrat
>>> party, the same party who started the 9/11 truther movement (an
>>> attempt at blaming Republicans for 9/11), slavery, Jim Crow,
>>> eugenics, institutionalized racism, forced sterilizations and
>>> inoculations that render women unable to bear children and which
>>> sickens and kills tens of thousands of kids worldwide (which is
>>> still going on today in many countries... paid for with US
>>> taxpayer money via USAID), and the Klimate Katastrophe Kook
>>> attempted environmental carbon exchange scam. LOL
>>>
>>> If you stoooopid fuckwits ever woke up to reality, your heads
>>> would collectively explode, and we'd have a couple grams of brain
>>> matter to clean up. LOL
>
> <crickets> LOL
>
>>>> ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to  
>>>> have
>>>> enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to cherry-pick  
>>>> what
>>>> you claim is the TRVTH.
>
>>> That you can't handle the truth that the earth will do just fine
>>> either with or without us, as it's done for billions of years, is
>>> noted, EnviroWhackJob.
>
>> it's ironic that you claim to understand science yet atmospheric science
>> eludes you.
>
> "Atmospheric science" like using a flawed computer climate model
> and falsified data to scream out kooky alarmist "zOMG! Globular
> Warmings!" while denying the raft of peer-reviewed proof such as
> ocean temperatures not changing one iota; Antarctica, Greenland
> and the Arctic glaciers adding ice at record levels; global
> temperatures decreasing for the past 15 years or so... yeah, you
> listen to the retards who have no understand of "atmospheric
> science", the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks in the IPCC. LOL
>
> ===============================================================
> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>
> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
> to for ~17 years:
> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>
> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
> Machine archived it):
> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
> ===============================================================
>
> Note that the above uses data from the very agencies who are
> k'laming "zOMG! Globular Warmings!"... their underlying data
> proves otherwise. Global warming is nothing more than a
> politicized scam, an attempt by libtard politicians to get carbon
> exchanges set up, increase the cost of living for everyone by
> hundreds of billions of dollars per year while siphoning off
> profits of billions of dollars per year... selling a solution
> that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>
> Prove otherwise, KookTard.
>
> <snicker>
>
>> it's cute that you can just wave your hand on alt.usenet.kooks and  
>> ignore
>> the sheer weight of all of the toxins, particulates, and waste that our
>> civilization dumps into the air and water.
>
> Is that why the libtards proposed dumping thousands of tons of
> toxins, particulates and waste directly into the upper atmosphere
> in a retarded attempt at global dimming, Hypocritical Dimmy? LOL
>
>> also, that part where you
>> think there's some k0oky conspiracy theory explaining why 97% of all
>> climate scientists are *certain* that climate change is currently
>> predominately driven by the effects of human activity, not sunspots,
>> polarity flips, or jebus.
>
> LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and stupid...
> they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass long enough
> to do their own research, and even if they could, that hard math
> eludes them. LOL
>
> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
> humans are causing global warming
>
> SPNAK! #4
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
> =========================================================
> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
> caused!".
>
> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>
> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
> University of Queensland.
>
> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
> science articles.
>
> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
> uncertain."
>
> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
> position that humans are causing the warming."
>
> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>
> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
> that hard math eludes them.
> =========================================================
>
> If poking holes in your kooky worldview is as simple as pointing
> out your conceptual and mathematical errors, your worldview is
> false. Take this to heart... your belief in a false worldview
> classifies you as delusional at best, most likely insane.
>
> <snicker>
>
>> <points and laughs at you>
>
> He says, standing in front of a mirror and projecting. LOL
>
> The "zOMG! Globular Warmings!" scam is done. The lie has been
> exposed, no one believes the libtard bullshit anymore... not even
> the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks flogging the alarmist bullshit:
>
> ===============================================================
> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
> public relations problem for us."
> - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked University
> of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
> ===============================================================
>
> Kook.
>
> <snicker>
>

says kemtrailKook.

-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

--

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273311

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
<news:op.x3r95iistm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 12:57:28 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
>> <news:op.x3r1ku0wtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
>> first into the wood chipper again:

>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:23:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>>>>> only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere
>>>>> since the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.

>>>> Hence your libtard party's solution of chemtrails dumping
>>>> thousands of tons per year of chemicals into the atmosphere in an
>>>> attempt at "global dimming". LOL

>> <crickets> LOL

>>>> Oh, stoooopid libtard didn't know about the libtard envirowhackos
>>>> supporting that bit of insanity, did it? LOL

>>>>> thanks for stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an  
>>>>> idiot.

>>>> Projection on your own part and on the part of the party you
>>>> support, the murderous thieving mentally-ill liberal Democrat
>>>> party, the same party who started the 9/11 truther movement (an
>>>> attempt at blaming Republicans for 9/11), slavery, Jim Crow,
>>>> eugenics, institutionalized racism, forced sterilizations and
>>>> inoculations that render women unable to bear children and which
>>>> sickens and kills tens of thousands of kids worldwide (which is
>>>> still going on today in many countries... paid for with US
>>>> taxpayer money via USAID), and the Klimate Katastrophe Kook
>>>> attempted environmental carbon exchange scam. LOL
>>>>
>>>> If you stoooopid fuckwits ever woke up to reality, your heads
>>>> would collectively explode, and we'd have a couple grams of brain
>>>> matter to clean up. LOL

>> <crickets> LOL

>>>>> ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to  
>>>>> have enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to cherry-pick  
>>>>> what you claim is the TRVTH.

>>>> That you can't handle the truth that the earth will do just fine
>>>> either with or without us, as it's done for billions of years, is
>>>> noted, EnviroWhackJob.

>>> it's ironic that you claim to understand science yet atmospheric science
>>> eludes you.

>> "Atmospheric science" like using a flawed computer climate model
>> and falsified data to scream out kooky alarmist "zOMG! Globular
>> Warmings!" while denying the raft of peer-reviewed proof such as
>> ocean temperatures not changing one iota; Antarctica, Greenland
>> and the Arctic glaciers adding ice at record levels; global
>> temperatures decreasing for the past 15 years or so... yeah, you
>> listen to the retards who have no understand of "atmospheric
>> science", the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks in the IPCC. LOL
>>
>> ===============================================================
>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>>
>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
>> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
>> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
>> to for ~17 years:
>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>>
>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
>> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
>> Machine archived it):
>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
>> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>> ===============================================================
>>
>> Note that the above uses data from the very agencies who are
>> k'laming "zOMG! Globular Warmings!"... their underlying data
>> proves otherwise. Global warming is nothing more than a
>> politicized scam, an attempt by libtard politicians to get carbon
>> exchanges set up, increase the cost of living for everyone by
>> hundreds of billions of dollars per year while siphoning off
>> profits of billions of dollars per year... selling a solution
>> that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>>
>> Prove otherwise, KookTard.
>>
>> <snicker>

>>> it's cute that you can just wave your hand on alt.usenet.kooks and  
>>> ignore the sheer weight of all of the toxins, particulates, and waste that our
>>> civilization dumps into the air and water.

>> Is that why the libtards proposed dumping thousands of tons of
>> toxins, particulates and waste directly into the upper atmosphere
>> in a retarded attempt at global dimming, Hypocritical Dimmy? LOL

>>> also, that part where you
>>> think there's some k0oky conspiracy theory explaining why 97% of all
>>> climate scientists are *certain* that climate change is currently
>>> predominately driven by the effects of human activity, not sunspots,
>>> polarity flips, or jebus.

>> LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and stupid...
>> they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass long enough
>> to do their own research, and even if they could, that hard math
>> eludes them. LOL
>>
>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
>> humans are causing global warming
>>
>> SPNAK! #4
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
>> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
>> =========================================================
>> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
>> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
>> caused!".
>>
>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>
>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>> University of Queensland.
>>
>> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
>> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
>> science articles.
>>
>> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
>> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
>> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
>> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
>> uncertain."
>>
>> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
>> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
>> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
>> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
>> position that humans are causing the warming."
>>
>> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
>> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
>> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
>> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
>> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
>> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
>> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>>
>> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
>> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
>> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
>> that hard math eludes them.
>> =========================================================
>>
>> If poking holes in your kooky worldview is as simple as pointing
>> out your conceptual and mathematical errors, your worldview is
>> false. Take this to heart... your belief in a false worldview
>> classifies you as delusional at best, most likely insane.
>>
>> <snicker>

>>> <points and laughs at you>

>> He says, standing in front of a mirror and projecting. LOL
>>
>> The "zOMG! Globular Warmings!" scam is done. The lie has been
>> exposed, no one believes the libtard bullshit anymore... not even
>> the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks flogging the alarmist bullshit:
>>
>> ===============================================================
>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
>> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
>> public relations problem for us."
>> - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked University
>> of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
>> ===============================================================
>>
>> Kook.
>>
>> <snicker>

> says kemtrailKook.

You've already had your teeth kicked in about this, you've tucked
tail, and ran away... thereby admitting you're a delusional
fuckwit who didn't know the libtards have been talking about
climate manipulation by spraying chemtrails to increase "global
dimming" since 1996.

Message-ID: <9f29b4c9531f669cfa3509755ff91f80@dizum.com>

SPNAK! on the delusional dildoriding bootfucked kooktard.

<snicker>

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 394 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273317

On 8/22/2015 3:14 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>



        <snicker> ?    like (chuckle) ?


that's gay dude, seriously.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273325

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

gilber34, in <news:mrapps$a3f$1@speranza.aioe.org> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:

> On 8/22/2015 3:14 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

>         <snicker> ?    like (chuckle) ?
> 
> that's gay dude, seriously.

Hi, Socky. And you'd know "gay" how, exactly?

Of course, you do realize I'm married to a gorgeous busty babe and
have six kids... but you apparently know gay... so get to expounding
upon your expansive knowledge of all things gay, "dude". LOL

You want gay? My .sig is chock-a-block full of it... now that's _your_
brand of gay, eh?

<snicker>

-- 

FNVWe:
"The Man Who Spanked Chimpy Checkmate The Cowardly CockSmoker Out Of
AUK, Then Out Of The Flonk, Then Into Insanity, Then Made Him Run Away
Like A Little Spankard Bitch. Again."

In which Checkmate admits to being a faggot and fantasizing about men:
MID: <feb093af883d0bf288e85863264900ed@dizum.com>
MID: <ab050c692202f7d955f7d2876fd39d56@dizum.com>

In which Checkmate says he wants to spank guys all night long:
MID: <k3m5ls$3pr$1@news.mixmin.net>

In which Checkmate confesses his desire to fuck who he claims is a
guy:
MID: <k3oolf$cpe$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <k9nj0v$u4a$2@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
MID: <l8ogd6$1cd$4@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <lclrtd$eei$4@news.mixmin.net>

In which Checkmate admits he'd definitely fuck a male dog:
MID: <k2h0j1$6ll$5@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <k4dsc7$l32$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <k5m8o5$vmq$5@newsfeed.x-privat.org>

In which Checkmate admits to having a golden showers fetish:
MID: <k79p80$9ps$3@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
MID: <k8t9l0$nf0$5@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
MID: <k8t9kv$nev$5@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
MID: <k994eg$77l$1@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
MID: <k9i8is$sna$3@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
MID: <lf3noh$sqv$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <76b587bf03232be29596c7a5e11f8eef@dizum.com>
MID: <d1590e1490afb94915166440ceb1190f@dizum.com>
MID: <4c614669bd9da0e2ab54c7a8618864f2@dizum.com>

In which Checkmate asks a guy for a blowjob (again):
MID: <ka4m1r$8rs$2@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
MID: <knd50p$7ni$2@news.albasani.net>
MID: <knnmme$3a4$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <kp77db$rqk$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <kvvjjb$a8t$3@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <kvvjjb$a8u$3@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l069qt$g3j$9@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l1b6g1$qqv$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l65hh2$jpd$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l9b7ha$ret$4@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <lfe72e$q0s$4@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <lffimp$k2f$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <13de9e018d33aa5c02a89f8acfd8c2f8@dizum.com>
MID: <ddfe5035129d525fb2c441289a7b3c1b@dizum.com>
MID: <8352c247386df60552fec12941ad0c47@dizum.com>
MID: <863c1b2a4221005e6d5252e4b2f955b1@dizum.com>
MID: <9d7e6e672aa61c16813ade0f2815d0bf@dizum.com>
MID: <aacd887c22128680f39ec3ca7f7e1613@dizum.com>
MID: <372519cc110e5acf0d73268cb1a697e9@dizum.com>

Checkmate's got a thing about tickling guy's asses with random
objects:
MID: <l8rapt$rfm$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <lfm4f8$3jb$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <li2ao1$3rf$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <37fb49820eaf36d0a45e91ce73d37d44@dizum.com>
MID: <13badb999438389ea8894228e51614a3@dizum.com>
MID: <2ce704d96dbf41ca89fd9eda221cb83c@dizum.com>
MID: <f9b10e223db85839d004420449391270@dizum.com>
MID: <184091e3de3a10096805606ec6dc5866@dizum.com>
MID: <ee740ba6bc409af0d2b4a66170b4e4d7@dizum.com>
MID: <d1d62217afbcbf98470365178072415a@dizum.com>
MID: <ac96244a69bc75dd3a60e8defda0b966@dizum.com>
MID: <9f02c35ef6d67ac06ee55f90199c3aaa@dizum.com>
MID: <3e4b3a8bb953839b7d2658130dcb927e@dizum.com>
MID: <9ec2ad3439122a906207c9f74c4a3a06@dizum.com>
MID: <761ef52f7fc54d46dd50e2692e160d92@dizum.com>
MID: <8ef71d83a5af476e6e275ea23b984323@dizum.com>

Checkmate's so gay he repeatedly insists that a picture of a vagina is
actually an asshole and balls... he went on and on about assholes and
balls... couldn't shut up about them... come to find out, he was just
trying to tell us that his lost love was actually a man:
MID: <l84jo7$cnd$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l84oip$icu$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l85ste$ao$3@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l87aud$saf$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l88ptv$nlj$3@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l8dvdt$tj2$4@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l8kl20$91i$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l8psgt$m7d$1@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l8rapv$rfm$3@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <l98brg$6hp$6@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <ldg914$pel$2@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <31e4747ee7179064b1fdd5266cd08d72@dizum.com>

Chimpy the neurotic overwrought hysterical hissy-fit ninny escalates
his prescription drug abuse to "calm the fuck down" (Chimpy's words):
MID: <512f192b17a529cc6d490a55c43ac1be@dizum.com> - Oxy, Neurontin
MID: <kjucol$ckr$3@newsfeed.x-privat.org> - Oxy, Vicodin
MID: <kmqoip$cg3$8@news.albasani.net> - Norco
MID: <knc9l2$e66$2@news.albasani.net> - Vicodin
MID: <6lnn79.ppd.17.10@news.alt.net> - Oxycodone, Vicodin
MID: <6lo0dt.b7.17.4@news.alt.net> - Xanax
MID: <krt925$u63$3@news.mixmin.net> - N2O
MID: <6o9mv7.7ra.17.1@news.alt.net> - Vicodin
MID: <6os03j.f3.19.2@news.alt.net> - Vicodin
MID: <6p12vg.of8.19.2@news.alt.net> - Marijuana
MID: <6pg2lv.v27.17.2@news.alt.net> - Vicodin
MID: <kuqmlq$mi7$1@news.mixmin.net> - Amphetamine (!)
MID: <6qprvj.ndm.17.1@news.alt.net> - Vicodin
MID: <6r26ti.ju0.19.2@news.alt.net> - Vicodin
MID: <6stbk8.pbh.19.43@news.alt.net> - Ecstasy
MID: <l1b6g2$qr0$2@news.mixmin.net> - Vicodin
MID: <l5kd53$8kd$1@news.mixmin.net> - Norco
MID: <lanvc8$f06$2@news.mixmin.net> - Norco
MID: <larrim$lft$1@news.mixmin.net> - N2O
MID: <lcckii$mue$3@news.mixmin.net> - N2O
MID: <e7848d7ebc7f0b52e126bc35d82a65cf@dizum.com> - Hydrocodone,
Alprazolam
MID: <MPG.2eb9f496c779fc2998a54c@news.alt.net> - Percocet

Chimpy Checkmate's Famous Faggotisms:
=====================================
Chimpy's desperate plea to a dude:
MID: <5b690abba10d04da8f7675d278f2c2b8@dizum.com>
"Diddle me!"

MID: <07b50fac74279fabaf78a605899b7934@dizum.com>
"Trojans are a condiment."

Chimpy discusses his new boyfriend, Dave "SnuhWolf" Norris:
MID: <c565ada4723ca2e5cd1259cf8a1d86df@dizum.com>
"Snuhbaby makes a good cock warmer."

MID: <ffd2a514115a20cb3122e71b81907a1f@dizum.com>
"Pack your donut hole, any time, anywhere!"

Chimpy discussing the relative merits of 4 inches versus 10 inches:
MID: <b62ad5949e43f36901836bb59898426a@dizum.com>
"Plus, I suppose it doesn't hurt as much when they stuff it up your
butt."

MID: <MPG.2a5ec5516fc9605298b5ac@news.alt.net>
"Best you keester a kielbasa."

Message-ID: <kvvjjb$a8t$3@news.mixmin.net>
"Brag about it to my dick."
"My dick can't quite hear you, could you come a little closer?"

MID: <knnmmb$3a4$1@news.mixmin.net>
"If you see a dick, suck it."

MID: <6qft9a.g1f.19.1@news.alt.net>
"The Winchester 1892 would make a damned-good dildo."

MID: <l61jjg$tth$1@news.mixmin.net>
"Pump a rump."

MID: <l9d76m$k1v$4@news.mixmin.net>
"You gerbils are always in the dark."

MID: <lal84d$g2u$5@news.mixmin.net>
MID: <97bfaeca4f3abe27b5f6683e319cdb18@dizum.com>
"I gotta gay named Guido from Jersey"

MID: <lamgt8$b2d$1@news.mixmin.net>
"If they're soft, yer probably blowin' it all wrong."

MID: <lchub0$q96$5@news.mixmin.net>
"Hitler would have made a damned good Queen."

MID: <lcsgjb$obk$2@news.mixmin.net>
"Don't get slapped by the cocks you crave."

MID: <b068d280517a2d6c831d4a43f2cc8d31@dizum.com>
To a nearly toothless man:
"I wouldn't pay you to suck my dick if your last tooth fell out."
So Chimpy prefers paying *nearly* toothless men for blowjobs, but not
*fully* toothless men. LOL

MID: <afe97a65ff77e7382ad77cf18ea63e85@dizum.com>
"If I send you some money, will you suck Greg's dick?"
Chimpy likes to watch. LOL

MID: <9d7e6e672aa61c16813ade0f2815d0bf@dizum.com>
"Suck my clit."
Chimpy's proposition to a tranny sucking faggot who gets around being
gay by claiming tranny cocks are 'huge dangling clits'. LOL
=====================================

What a FAG!

Melt, Chimpy, melt.
Froth, Chimpy, froth.
Dance, Chimpy, dance!

<snicker>

/\                  Properly known as Bill
  \    /\      The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
   \  /  \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
    \/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.

Accept no substitutes...
if it's from Databasix, it's a sure bet it's from a kook.

databasix.com / PacketDerm, LLC / COTSE:
all branches of the same malignant tree.

Message-ID: <l7m8ig$1ld$7@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <l7m8jh$1le$8@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <l7m8lh$1le$9@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <l7m8ne$1ld$8@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <l7m8pc$1le$10@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <l7m8rb$1ld$9@news.mixmin.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273373

On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:14:10 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
> <news:op.x3r95iistm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
> first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 12:57:28 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>
>>> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
>>> <news:op.x3r1ku0wtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
>>> first into the wood chipper again:
>
>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:23:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote  
>>>> Wrangler
>>>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>>>>>> only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere
>>>>>> since the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.
>
>>>>> Hence your libtard party's solution of chemtrails dumping
>>>>> thousands of tons per year of chemicals into the atmosphere in an
>>>>> attempt at "global dimming". LOL
>
>>> <crickets> LOL
>
>>>>> Oh, stoooopid libtard didn't know about the libtard envirowhackos
>>>>> supporting that bit of insanity, did it? LOL
>
>>>>>> thanks for stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an
>>>>>> idiot.
>
>>>>> Projection on your own part and on the part of the party you
>>>>> support, the murderous thieving mentally-ill liberal Democrat
>>>>> party, the same party who started the 9/11 truther movement (an
>>>>> attempt at blaming Republicans for 9/11), slavery, Jim Crow,
>>>>> eugenics, institutionalized racism, forced sterilizations and
>>>>> inoculations that render women unable to bear children and which
>>>>> sickens and kills tens of thousands of kids worldwide (which is
>>>>> still going on today in many countries... paid for with US
>>>>> taxpayer money via USAID), and the Klimate Katastrophe Kook
>>>>> attempted environmental carbon exchange scam. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> If you stoooopid fuckwits ever woke up to reality, your heads
>>>>> would collectively explode, and we'd have a couple grams of brain
>>>>> matter to clean up. LOL
>
>>> <crickets> LOL
>
>>>>>> ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to
>>>>>> have enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to  
>>>>>> cherry-pick
>>>>>> what you claim is the TRVTH.
>
>>>>> That you can't handle the truth that the earth will do just fine
>>>>> either with or without us, as it's done for billions of years, is
>>>>> noted, EnviroWhackJob.
>
>>>> it's ironic that you claim to understand science yet atmospheric  
>>>> science
>>>> eludes you.
>
>>> "Atmospheric science" like using a flawed computer climate model
>>> and falsified data to scream out kooky alarmist "zOMG! Globular
>>> Warmings!" while denying the raft of peer-reviewed proof such as
>>> ocean temperatures not changing one iota; Antarctica, Greenland
>>> and the Arctic glaciers adding ice at record levels; global
>>> temperatures decreasing for the past 15 years or so... yeah, you
>>> listen to the retards who have no understand of "atmospheric
>>> science", the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks in the IPCC. LOL
>>>
>>> ===============================================================
>>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>>>
>>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
>>> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
>>> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
>>> to for ~17 years:
>>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>>>
>>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
>>> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
>>> Machine archived it):
>>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
>>> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>>> ===============================================================
>>>
>>> Note that the above uses data from the very agencies who are
>>> k'laming "zOMG! Globular Warmings!"... their underlying data
>>> proves otherwise. Global warming is nothing more than a
>>> politicized scam, an attempt by libtard politicians to get carbon
>>> exchanges set up, increase the cost of living for everyone by
>>> hundreds of billions of dollars per year while siphoning off
>>> profits of billions of dollars per year... selling a solution
>>> that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>>>
>>> Prove otherwise, KookTard.
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>
>>>> it's cute that you can just wave your hand on alt.usenet.kooks and
>>>> ignore the sheer weight of all of the toxins, particulates, and waste  
>>>> that our
>>>> civilization dumps into the air and water.
>
>>> Is that why the libtards proposed dumping thousands of tons of
>>> toxins, particulates and waste directly into the upper atmosphere
>>> in a retarded attempt at global dimming, Hypocritical Dimmy? LOL
>
>>>> also, that part where you
>>>> think there's some k0oky conspiracy theory explaining why 97% of all
>>>> climate scientists are *certain* that climate change is currently
>>>> predominately driven by the effects of human activity, not sunspots,
>>>> polarity flips, or jebus.
>
>>> LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and stupid...
>>> they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass long enough
>>> to do their own research, and even if they could, that hard math
>>> eludes them. LOL
>>>
>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
>>> humans are causing global warming
>>>
>>> SPNAK! #4
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
>>> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
>>> =========================================================
>>> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
>>> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
>>> caused!".
>>>
>>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>>
>>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>>> University of Queensland.
>>>
>>> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
>>> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
>>> science articles.
>>>
>>> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
>>> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
>>> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
>>> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
>>> uncertain."
>>>
>>> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
>>> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
>>> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
>>> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
>>> position that humans are causing the warming."
>>>
>>> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
>>> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
>>> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
>>> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
>>> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
>>> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
>>> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>>>
>>> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
>>> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
>>> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
>>> that hard math eludes them.
>>> =========================================================
>>>
>>> If poking holes in your kooky worldview is as simple as pointing
>>> out your conceptual and mathematical errors, your worldview is
>>> false. Take this to heart... your belief in a false worldview
>>> classifies you as delusional at best, most likely insane.
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>
>>>> <points and laughs at you>
>
>>> He says, standing in front of a mirror and projecting. LOL
>>>
>>> The "zOMG! Globular Warmings!" scam is done. The lie has been
>>> exposed, no one believes the libtard bullshit anymore... not even
>>> the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks flogging the alarmist bullshit:
>>>
>>> ===============================================================
>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
>>> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
>>> public relations problem for us."
>>> - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked University
>>> of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
>>> ===============================================================
>>>
>>> Kook.
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>
>> says kemtrailKook.
>
> You've already had your teeth kicked in about this, you've tucked
> tail, and ran away... thereby admitting you're a delusional
> fuckwit who didn't know the libtards have been talking about
> climate manipulation by spraying chemtrails to increase "global
> dimming" since 1996.
>
> Message-ID: <9f29b4c9531f669cfa3509755ff91f80@dizum.com>
>
> SPNAK! on the delusional dildoriding bootfucked kooktard.
>
> <snicker>
>

dumbshit kemtrailKook says the gubbament is trying to reverse that global  
warming thing that doesn't exist!

BWAHAHAHAHA!

-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

--

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273421

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka DildoRider) of
5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as
root@127.0.0.1, in <news:op.x3s9wpxytm21m2@benson.localhost> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again on Date: Sun, 23
Aug 2015 04:01:27 -0400:

4:01 AM... up frothing in the wee hours again, BootFuckee? LOL

> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:14:10 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
>> <news:op.x3r95iistm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
>> first into the wood chipper again:

>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 12:57:28 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>>
>>>> Robert M. Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>>> Jockey), socked up as root@127.0.0.1, in
>>>> <news:op.x3r1ku0wtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
>>>> first into the wood chipper again:

>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:23:03 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote  
>>>>> Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>>>>>>> only an idiot would think that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere
>>>>>>> since the industrial revolution doesn't have any long-term effects.

>>>>>> Hence your libtard party's solution of chemtrails dumping
>>>>>> thousands of tons per year of chemicals into the atmosphere in an
>>>>>> attempt at "global dimming". LOL

>>>> <crickets> LOL

>>>>>> Oh, stoooopid libtard didn't know about the libtard envirowhackos
>>>>>> supporting that bit of insanity, did it? LOL

>>>>>>> thanks for stepping up and letting everybody know that you're an
>>>>>>> idiot.

>>>>>> Projection on your own part and on the part of the party you
>>>>>> support, the murderous thieving mentally-ill liberal Democrat
>>>>>> party, the same party who started the 9/11 truther movement (an
>>>>>> attempt at blaming Republicans for 9/11), slavery, Jim Crow,
>>>>>> eugenics, institutionalized racism, forced sterilizations and
>>>>>> inoculations that render women unable to bear children and which
>>>>>> sickens and kills tens of thousands of kids worldwide (which is
>>>>>> still going on today in many countries... paid for with US
>>>>>> taxpayer money via USAID), and the Klimate Katastrophe Kook
>>>>>> attempted environmental carbon exchange scam. LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you stoooopid fuckwits ever woke up to reality, your heads
>>>>>> would collectively explode, and we'd have a couple grams of brain
>>>>>> matter to clean up. LOL

>>>> <crickets> LOL

>>>>>>> ironic, given that you clearly appreciate science, you just seem to
>>>>>>> have enough of a stake in conservative whackjob politics to  
>>>>>>> cherry-pick what you claim is the TRVTH.

>>>>>> That you can't handle the truth that the earth will do just fine
>>>>>> either with or without us, as it's done for billions of years, is
>>>>>> noted, EnviroWhackJob.

>>>>> it's ironic that you claim to understand science yet atmospheric  
>>>>> science eludes you.

>>>> "Atmospheric science" like using a flawed computer climate model
>>>> and falsified data to scream out kooky alarmist "zOMG! Globular
>>>> Warmings!" while denying the raft of peer-reviewed proof such as
>>>> ocean temperatures not changing one iota; Antarctica, Greenland
>>>> and the Arctic glaciers adding ice at record levels; global
>>>> temperatures decreasing for the past 15 years or so... yeah, you
>>>> listen to the retards who have no understand of "atmospheric
>>>> science", the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks in the IPCC. LOL
>>>>
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>>>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>>>>
>>>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
>>>> ~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
>>>> dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
>>>> to for ~17 years:
>>>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>>>>
>>>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>>>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
>>>> recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
>>>> Machine archived it):
>>>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>>>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
>>>> *falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>
>>>> Note that the above uses data from the very agencies who are
>>>> k'laming "zOMG! Globular Warmings!"... their underlying data
>>>> proves otherwise. Global warming is nothing more than a
>>>> politicized scam, an attempt by libtard politicians to get carbon
>>>> exchanges set up, increase the cost of living for everyone by
>>>> hundreds of billions of dollars per year while siphoning off
>>>> profits of billions of dollars per year... selling a solution
>>>> that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
>>>>
>>>> Prove otherwise, KookTard.
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>

<crickets> LOL!

>>>>> it's cute that you can just wave your hand on alt.usenet.kooks and
>>>>> ignore the sheer weight of all of the toxins, particulates, and waste  
>>>>> that our civilization dumps into the air and water.

>>>> Is that why the libtards proposed dumping thousands of tons of
>>>> toxins, particulates and waste directly into the upper atmosphere
>>>> in a retarded attempt at global dimming, Hypocritical Dimmy? LOL

>>>>> also, that part where you think there's some k0oky conspiracy
>>>>> theory explaining why 97% of all climate scientists are
>>>>> *certain* that climate change is currently predominately driven
>>>>> by the effects of human activity, not sunspots, polarity flips,
>>>>> or jebus.

>>>> LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and stupid...
>>>> they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass long enough
>>>> to do their own research, and even if they could, that hard math
>>>> eludes them. LOL
>>>>
>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
>>>> humans are causing global warming
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK! #4
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
>>>> Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
>>>> =========================================================
>>>> The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
>>>> of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
>>>> caused!".
>>>>
>>>> Where did this 97% figure come from?
>>>>
>>>> When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
>>>> convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
>>>> comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
>>>> University of Queensland.
>>>>
>>>> What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
>>>> (not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
>>>> science articles.
>>>>
>>>> But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
>>>> study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
>>>> position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
>>>> anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
>>>> uncertain."
>>>>
>>>> That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
>>>> human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
>>>> for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
>>>> human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
>>>> position that humans are causing the warming."
>>>>
>>>> 11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
>>>> (3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
>>>> global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
>>>> "climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
>>>> assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
>>>> papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
>>>> and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
>>>>
>>>> But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
>>>> stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
>>>> long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
>>>> that hard math eludes them.
>>>> =========================================================
>>>>
>>>> If poking holes in your kooky worldview is as simple as pointing
>>>> out your conceptual and mathematical errors, your worldview is
>>>> false. Take this to heart... your belief in a false worldview
>>>> classifies you as delusional at best, most likely insane.
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>

<crickets> LOL!

>>>>> <points and laughs at you>

>>>> He says, standing in front of a mirror and projecting. LOL
>>>>
>>>> The "zOMG! Globular Warmings!" scam is done. The lie has been
>>>> exposed, no one believes the libtard bullshit anymore... not even
>>>> the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks flogging the alarmist bullshit:
>>>>
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>>>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>>>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
>>>> global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
>>>> public relations problem for us."
>>>> - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked University
>>>> of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>
>>>> Kook.
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>

<crickets> LOL!

>>> says kemtrailKook.

>> You've already had your teeth kicked in about this, you've tucked
>> tail, and ran away... thereby admitting you're a delusional
>> fuckwit who didn't know the libtards have been talking about
>> climate manipulation by spraying chemtrails to increase "global
>> dimming" since 1996.
>>
>> Message-ID: <9f29b4c9531f669cfa3509755ff91f80@dizum.com>
>>
>> SPNAK! on the delusional dildoriding bootfucked kooktard.
>>
>> <snicker>

> dumbshit kemtrailKook says the gubbament is trying to reverse that global  
> warming thing that doesn't exist!

Awww, is poor kook melting down and spewing lies now?

Message-ID: <9f29b4c9531f669cfa3509755ff91f80@dizum.com>
"I never said I believed in it, merely that members of your
libtard collective have proposed it. Stoooopid. LOL"

And that's why you're melting down... because your own libtard
comrades have proposed chemtrail spraying (ie: dumping *more*
pollutants into the upper atmosphere... because they're such fervent
envirowhackos they want to save the earth by polluting it more LOL)
for climate manipulation (to reverse the nonexistent global warming
that the *libtards* delusionally believe in) from as far back as 1996,
as I proved, spanking you and your denial of same until you started
crying. :(

You're not very bright, so you're not very good at this Usenet thing,
Dimmy.

<snicker>

> BWAHAHAHAHA!

Capslock froth and delusional manic laughter, noted.

<snicker>

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then demanded
that evidence again and again, only to snip it out again; she denied
having written what she clearly wrote (after she snipped it out, of
course); she k'lamed that I'd written things I clearly didn't (and she
failed to back up her k'lames with proof); she stated that zoanthropy
and transexualism aren't mental illnesses (they are listed in the
DSM); that the psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as
such by taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes a
mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD" that's
"been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no proof of this
k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into admitting her belief
that gays have suffered "no harm" in living a lifestyle that's given
19% of them AIDS, causes the gay community to account for 63% of new
AIDS cases per year (per the CDC) and kills thousands of them per
year; she stated that liberalism is growing when it's actually in
decline (and stated that conservatism is dying when it's actually
growing and has a nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had
the audacity to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd
used to prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out
so badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when they're
growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that land ice is
slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per Nasa's ICESat);
she stated that global temperature is rising when it's been falling
for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA, and accounting for the
revelations that US climate researchers outright falsified the data to
give the impression that a 90 year cooling trend was actually a
warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as the driver for global temperature
change, then quoted a web page that says the exact opposite (the same
web page, BTW, that I'd used to prove that CO2 lags temperature
change, proving yet again her loss of reading comprehension)... then
she *admitted* CO2 lags global temperature change, thereby being
forced to agree with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the
driver for global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been
unable to explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician, 1
today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she presented
examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed were conservative
(but they turned out to be liberal, socialist or were the result of a
liberal upbringing); she tried to state that Nazism was a conservative
political party (it's a form of liberal fascism that takes many of its
tenets directly from socialism); she failed to provide any proof of
some of her kooky contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used
a flawed and biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an
actual scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist
herself); she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple
math; she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that every
major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals (when it was
conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming majority of civil
rights bills, to the strident opposition of the liberals), she k'lamed
she knows who I am due to her "kookology experience", "profound
psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis skills", yet she's thus far
run from five challenges to out me, for 395 days and counting (ie: she
doesn't dare provide any of her so-called "proof", for fear that she
outs the fact that she's kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and
her loss of reading comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss
of being able to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she
was receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not attention-whoring
for all the boys because her make-believe husband isn't paying enough
attention to her fat, ugly, delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273265

In article <912488b37266b47a0fa782f0f8a9d45f@dizum.com>,
 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus 
 <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?

Planet Earth is in an ice age with no end in sight.

45 million year old Antarctic ice sheet.
18 million year old Greenland ice sheet.
3 million year old Isthmus of Panama. 
2.5 million year old Quaternary ice age. 

Followup-To set. Apologies.

-- 
Jed Clampett

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273282

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Jed Clampett, in
<news:jc-57CB3A.01401522082015@news.albasani.net> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:

> In article <912488b37266b47a0fa782f0f8a9d45f@dizum.com>,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus 
> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Solar output in the Ordovician was very nearly what it is today
>> (0.991 Ordovician, 1 today), yet CO2 concentrations in the
>> Ordovician were at least 5 times higher than today. And yet the
>> Ordovician slipped into an ice age that lasted ~1,000,000 years.
>>
>> If, as you libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks k'lame, CO2 is a
>> driver of temperature change, given that CO2 levels are at least
>> 5 times lower today, why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?

> Planet Earth is in an ice age with no end in sight.

Technically, we're still coming out of the tail end of the
Quaternary ice age. We're still considered to be in the Holocene
epoch interglacial, though.

> 45 million year old Antarctic ice sheet.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18949-the-history-of-ice-on-earth/
==================================================
Antarctica freezes over
14 million years ago

Antarctica wasn't always a frozen wasteland. It wasn't until
around 34 million years ago that the first small glaciers formed
on the tops of Antarctica's mountains. And it was 20 million
years later, when world-wide temperatures dropped by 8 degrees C,
that the glaciers' ice froze onto the rock, and the southern ice
sheet was born.

The northern hemisphere remained relatively ice-free for longer,
with Greenland and the Arctic becoming heavily glaciated only
around 3.2 million years ago.
==================================================

> 18 million year old Greenland ice sheet.

I again quote from above:
"The northern hemisphere remained relatively ice-free for longer,
with Greenland and the Arctic becoming heavily glaciated only
around 3.2 million years ago."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet
"The ice in the current ice sheet is as old as 110,000 years.[3]"

[3] Meese, DA, AJ Gow, RB Alley, GA Zielinski, PM Grootes, M Ram,
KC Taylor, PA Mayewski, JF Bolzan (1997) The Greenland Ice Sheet
Project 2 depth-age scale: Methods and results. Journal of
Geophysical Research. C. Oceans. 102(C12):26,411-26,423.

> 3 million year old Isthmus of Panama. 

The Isthmus of Panama is a landmass, not a glacier. It has a
tropical climate. The Central American Seaway was raised above
sea level by the Coco Plate sliding under the Caribbean Plate,
forming the Isthmus of Panama 12 to 15 million years ago via the
creation of islands via volcanic activity. Sedimentation
completed the isthmus approximately 4.5 million years ago.

The formation of the isthmus and subsequent altering of ocean
currents is believed to have initiated the formation of the
Arctic ice cap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isthmus_of_Panama

> 2.5 million year old Quaternary ice age. 

Yes, technically we are still in an ice age, given that we still
have glaciers. But we are in the Holocene epoch interglacial,
which began approximately 10,000 to 15,000 years ago.

You'll note the following... despite the Klimate Katastrophe
Kooks screaming about "anthropogenic globular warmings DURRRH!",
the study of deep-sea cores and the fossils contained in them
indicate that the fluctuation of climate during the last few
hundred thousand years is remarkably close to that predicted by
Milankovitch... IOW, it's just as I said, solar and orbital
forcing causes climate change as it has for every glaciation and
interglacial period throughout the planet's history. Humans
contribute almost nothing in comparison to that giant fusion
furnace in the sky.

CO2 is a negatively correlated feedback mechanism of the
Milankovitch cycle, not a driver of climate change. It's been
proven that CO2 lags temperature change by 600 - 1000 years, and
that CO2 causes *cooling* due to more efficient re-radiation of
heat back out to space in the infrared, on the dark side of the
planet. The net effect of an increase in CO2 would be larger
temperature drops on the dark side of the planet, the same as is
seen on Mars due to its high CO2 concentration.

> Followup-To set. Apologies.

F-Ups foiled. No apologies.

<snicker>

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 394 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273493

In article <200aed7b549c50619663f0f91a7a1aca@dizum.com>,
 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus 
 <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> Jed Clampett, in
> <news:jc-57CB3A.01401522082015@news.albasani.net> did thusly jump
> head first into the wood chipper again:
> 
> > In article <912488b37266b47a0fa782f0f8a9d45f@dizum.com>,
> > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus 
> > <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
> 
> >> Solar output in the Ordovician was very nearly what it is today
> >> (0.991 Ordovician, 1 today), yet CO2 concentrations in the
> >> Ordovician were at least 5 times higher than today. And yet the
> >> Ordovician slipped into an ice age that lasted ~1,000,000 years.
> >>
> >> If, as you libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks k'lame, CO2 is a
> >> driver of temperature change, given that CO2 levels are at least
> >> 5 times lower today, why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?
> 
> > Planet Earth is in an ice age with no end in sight.
> 
> Technically, we're still coming out of the tail end of the
> Quaternary ice age. We're still considered to be in the Holocene
> epoch interglacial, though.

Technically, we are not exiting the Quaternary ice age. 

> > 45 million year old Antarctic ice sheet.
> 
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18949-the-history-of-ice-on-earth/

You are quoting an article that repeatedly asserts
atmospheric CO2 levels to be the driving force of planetary
temperature. Some of their claims are probably facts,
but not that one. Also that article contradicts your
claim that

"we're still coming out of the tail end of the Quaternary ice age"

I think that ice ages are ultimately a result of continental
plate movements interfering with oceanic mixing. If oceans
are free to move heat from pole to pole then there is no
ice age. 

> ==================================================
> Antarctica freezes over
> 14 million years ago
> 
> Antarctica wasn't always a frozen wasteland. It wasn't until
> around 34 million years ago that the first small glaciers formed
> on the tops of Antarctica's mountains. And it was 20 million
> years later, when world-wide temperatures dropped by 8 degrees C,
> that the glaciers' ice froze onto the rock, and the southern ice
> sheet was born.
> 
> The northern hemisphere remained relatively ice-free for longer,
> with Greenland and the Arctic becoming heavily glaciated only
> around 3.2 million years ago.
> ==================================================

Yes, the ice sheet formed more like 14 mya. 
Sea ice rafting dates back further and I mistook that. 

> > 18 million year old Greenland ice sheet.
> 
> I again quote from above:
> "The northern hemisphere remained relatively ice-free for longer,
> with Greenland and the Arctic becoming heavily glaciated only
> around 3.2 million years ago."

"Heavily glaciated". The ice sheet or instances of them
date back further. 

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet
> "The ice in the current ice sheet is as old as 110,000 years.[3]"

Yes. That does not mean the ice sheet is 110,000 years old. 

> [3] Meese, DA, AJ Gow, RB Alley, GA Zielinski, PM Grootes, M Ram,
> KC Taylor, PA Mayewski, JF Bolzan (1997) The Greenland Ice Sheet
> Project 2 depth-age scale: Methods and results. Journal of
> Geophysical Research. C. Oceans. 102(C12):26,411-26,423.
> 
> > 3 million year old Isthmus of Panama. 
> 
> The Isthmus of Panama is a landmass, not a glacier. 

Nobody said otherwise. 

> It has a
> tropical climate. The Central American Seaway was raised above
> sea level by the Coco Plate sliding under the Caribbean Plate,
> forming the Isthmus of Panama 12 to 15 million years ago via the
> creation of islands via volcanic activity. Sedimentation
> completed the isthmus approximately 4.5 million years ago.
> 
> The formation of the isthmus and subsequent altering of ocean
> currents is believed to have initiated the formation of the
> Arctic ice cap.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isthmus_of_Panama
> 
> > 2.5 million year old Quaternary ice age. 
> 
> Yes, technically we are still in an ice age, given that we still
> have glaciers. But we are in the Holocene epoch interglacial,
> which began approximately 10,000 to 15,000 years ago.

Yes, I know. 

> You'll note the following... despite the Klimate Katastrophe
> Kooks screaming about "anthropogenic globular warmings DURRRH!",
> the study of deep-sea cores and the fossils contained in them
> indicate that the fluctuation of climate during the last few
> hundred thousand years is remarkably close to that predicted by
> Milankovitch... IOW, it's just as I said, solar and orbital
> forcing causes climate change as it has for every glaciation and
> interglacial period throughout the planet's history. Humans
> contribute almost nothing in comparison to that giant fusion
> furnace in the sky.
> 
> CO2 is a negatively correlated feedback mechanism of the
> Milankovitch cycle, not a driver of climate change. It's been
> proven that CO2 lags temperature change by 600 - 1000 years, and
> that CO2 causes *cooling* due to more efficient re-radiation of
> heat back out to space in the infrared, on the dark side of the
> planet. The net effect of an increase in CO2 would be larger
> temperature drops on the dark side of the planet, the same as is
> seen on Mars due to its high CO2 concentration.
> 
> > Followup-To set. Apologies.
> 
> F-Ups foiled. No apologies.
> <snicker>

-- 
Jed Clampett

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273565

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Jed Clampett, in <news:jc-3AA8BB.12552723082015@news.albasani.net> did 
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> In article <200aed7b549c50619663f0f91a7a1aca@dizum.com>,
>  Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus 
>  <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>> 
>> Jed Clampett, in
>> <news:jc-57CB3A.01401522082015@news.albasani.net> did thusly jump
>> head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> In article <912488b37266b47a0fa782f0f8a9d45f@dizum.com>,
>>> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus 
>>> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>>>> Solar output in the Ordovician was very nearly what it is today
>>>> (0.991 Ordovician, 1 today), yet CO2 concentrations in the
>>>> Ordovician were at least 5 times higher than today. And yet the
>>>> Ordovician slipped into an ice age that lasted ~1,000,000 years.
>>>>
>>>> If, as you libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks k'lame, CO2 is a
>>>> driver of temperature change, given that CO2 levels are at least
>>>> 5 times lower today, why aren't we in a perpetual ice age?

>>> Planet Earth is in an ice age with no end in sight.

>> Technically, we're still coming out of the tail end of the
>> Quaternary ice age. We're still considered to be in the Holocene
>> epoch interglacial, though.

> Technically, we are not exiting the Quaternary ice age. 

I'll rephrase... technically, we're still in the tail end of the 
Quaternary ice age.

Given that the names and dates of glacial and interglacial periods are 
human constructs, it remains to be seen whether the nascent cold trend 
(which started approximately 17 years ago and is contemporaneously 
known as the "global warming" pause; is accelerating; and according to 
tilt and precessional indexes and solar output trend predictions, 
should trend downward for ~10,000 years, before we settle into an 
~60,000 year deep freeze) is considered a new ice age, or a 
continuation of the Quaternary.

<http://www.oarval.org/Abdussamatov-25Nov2013-Image1av.gif>
Figure 1. Variations of both the TSI (Total Solar Irradiance) and 
solar activity in 1978-2013 and prognoses of these variations to 
cycles 24-27 until 2045. The arrow indicates the beginning of the new 
Little Ice Age epoch after the maximum of cycle 24.

>>> 45 million year old Antarctic ice sheet.

>> https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18949-the-history-of-ice-on-earth/

> You are quoting an article that repeatedly asserts
> atmospheric CO2 levels to be the driving force of planetary
> temperature.

Yes, I know. The timing is correct, the attribution of effect is not.

> Some of their claims are probably facts, but not that one. Also
> that article contradicts your claim that "we're still coming out
> of the tail end of the Quaternary ice age"
> 
> I think that ice ages are ultimately a result of continental
> plate movements interfering with oceanic mixing. If oceans
> are free to move heat from pole to pole then there is no
> ice age. 

>From equator to poles, you  mean. That is a secondary effect, as is 
heat transfer via air. The closing of the Central American Seaway and 
the rise of the Himalayas means we're stuck with ice even with a warm 
climate.

Solar and orbital forcing dictating the W/m^2 sunlight reaching the 
surface (as well as albedo reflecting that sunlight) is the big 
deciding factor in whether a glacial or interglacial period is in 
effect. The increased albedo of the ice we've got lowers the overall 
W/m^2 for the entire earth.

Which means the next glaciation period is gonna be a right bitch, 
since we've already got a head start on it with the ice we've already 
got.

>> ==================================================
>> Antarctica freezes over
>> 14 million years ago
>> 
>> Antarctica wasn't always a frozen wasteland. It wasn't until
>> around 34 million years ago that the first small glaciers formed
>> on the tops of Antarctica's mountains. And it was 20 million
>> years later, when world-wide temperatures dropped by 8 degrees C,
>> that the glaciers' ice froze onto the rock, and the southern ice
>> sheet was born.
>> 
>> The northern hemisphere remained relatively ice-free for longer,
>> with Greenland and the Arctic becoming heavily glaciated only
>> around 3.2 million years ago.
>> ==================================================

> Yes, the ice sheet formed more like 14 mya. 
> Sea ice rafting dates back further and I mistook that. 

>>> 18 million year old Greenland ice sheet.

>> I again quote from above:
>> "The northern hemisphere remained relatively ice-free for longer,
>> with Greenland and the Arctic becoming heavily glaciated only
>> around 3.2 million years ago."

> "Heavily glaciated". The ice sheet or instances of them
> date back further. 

They were much the same as Antarctica... isolated small glaciers which 
agglomerated into massive ice sheets over time as the Isthmus of 
Panama filled in over ~10.5 my, with a rapid acceleration of ice 
building since ~4.5 mya.

>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet
>> "The ice in the current ice sheet is as old as 110,000 years.[3]"

> Yes. That does not mean the ice sheet is 110,000 years old. 

True. That age is merely indicative of the residence time of the ice 
within the glacier as it plastic-flows toward the perimeter and 
calves.

Which puts truth to the lies of the libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks 
when they say the Greenland glacier will melt in a few decades or even 
centuries. That glacier has withstood far warmer periods than now, and 
it's still there.

Except it's not melting at all... it *added* 500 gT of ice in 2014... 
so the Klimate Katastrophe Kook blather about "zOMG! The Greenland 
glacier had 56 gT of melt last year!" is out-of-context alarmist 
propaganda... they counted only that which melted, not that which was 
added.

Balancing the equation (something the libtards never seem able to do), 
there was a total 556 gT of ice added, a total of 56 gT of melt, for a 
grand total of 500 gT net accumulation of ice to the Greenland glacier 
in 2014.

<http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/>

Antarctica is also growing... 

<http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2015/01/december-ends/>
=========================
By sharp contrast, sea ice in Antarctica was at satellite-era record 
high daily levels for much of 2014. On September 22, 2014, Antarctic 
ice extent reached 20.11 million square kilometers (7.76 million 
square miles). This was the first year in the modern satellite record 
that Antarctic ice extent climbed above 20 million square kilometers 
(7.72 million square miles).
=========================

The only reason the Arctic glacier isn't growing is because of the 
protracted primarily positive-phase Arctic Oscillation throughout 
2012-2015, which also partially explains why the western US is so dry 
right now... storms are pushed north.

<http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/month_ao_index.shtml>
<http://nsidc.org/icelights/2012/02/02/the-arctic-oscillation-winter-storms-and-sea-ice/>
"When the Arctic Oscillation is in its negative mode, the winds and 
ice tend to flow in a clockwise direction, generally keeping more of 
the older, thicker ice in the middle of the Arctic. In the positive 
phase, that old ice tends to get pushed out of the Arctic along the 
Greenland coast."

For a comparison, look at the massively negative AO starting near the 
end of 1968 and ending in 1970... 
<http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/assessments/pdfs/Snow%201969.pdf>
"A resume of the heavy snowfall and persistent cold of the winter of 
1968-1969 in the upper midwest and the flood situation resulting 
therefrom"

And 2009-2010:
<http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/new-york-cold-snap-rival-horrible-winters-1970s-article-1.460241>

>> [3] Meese, DA, AJ Gow, RB Alley, GA Zielinski, PM Grootes, M Ram,
>> KC Taylor, PA Mayewski, JF Bolzan (1997) The Greenland Ice Sheet
>> Project 2 depth-age scale: Methods and results. Journal of
>> Geophysical Research. C. Oceans. 102(C12):26,411-26,423.

>>> 3 million year old Isthmus of Panama. 

>> The Isthmus of Panama is a landmass, not a glacier. 

> Nobody said otherwise. 

>> It has a
>> tropical climate. The Central American Seaway was raised above
>> sea level by the Coco Plate sliding under the Caribbean Plate,
>> forming the Isthmus of Panama 12 to 15 million years ago via the
>> creation of islands via volcanic activity. Sedimentation
>> completed the isthmus approximately 4.5 million years ago.
>> 
>> The formation of the isthmus and subsequent altering of ocean
>> currents is believed to have initiated the formation of the
>> Arctic ice cap.
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isthmus_of_Panama

>>> 2.5 million year old Quaternary ice age. 

>> Yes, technically we are still in an ice age, given that we still
>> have glaciers. But we are in the Holocene epoch interglacial,
>> which began approximately 10,000 to 15,000 years ago.

> Yes, I know. 

>> You'll note the following... despite the Klimate Katastrophe
>> Kooks screaming about "anthropogenic globular warmings DURRRH!",
>> the study of deep-sea cores and the fossils contained in them
>> indicate that the fluctuation of climate during the last few
>> hundred thousand years is remarkably close to that predicted by
>> Milankovitch... IOW, it's just as I said, solar and orbital
>> forcing causes climate change as it has for every glaciation and
>> interglacial period throughout the planet's history. Humans
>> contribute almost nothing in comparison to that giant fusion
>> furnace in the sky.
>> 
>> CO2 is a negatively correlated feedback mechanism of the
>> Milankovitch cycle, not a driver of climate change. It's been
>> proven that CO2 lags temperature change by 600 - 1000 years, and
>> that CO2 causes *cooling* due to more efficient re-radiation of
>> heat back out to space in the infrared, on the dark side of the
>> planet. The net effect of an increase in CO2 would be larger
>> temperature drops on the dark side of the planet, the same as is
>> seen on Mars due to its high CO2 concentration.

>>> Followup-To set. Apologies.

>> F-Ups foiled. No apologies.
>> <snicker>

I have no idea how the libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks can continue 
in their climate denial of an impending ice age... glaciers adding 
land and sea ice at record levels, melt seasons shortening, sunlight 
W/m^2 falling (even the latest solar maximum was named a mini-max, the 
weakest solar maximum since the Little Ice Age, and TSI has continued 
falling since the sun's poles flipped in 2013), global temperatures 
trending downward according to NASA, UAH, RSS and UK Met, and even the 
Klimate Katastrophe Kooks discussing the impending ice age:
===============================================================
Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
<http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
"I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both global 
warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real public 
relations problem for us."
- Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked University of 
East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
===============================================================

But isn't it ironic that the libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kooks are 
beginning to become known as the climate deniers?

<snicker>

-- 

Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then demanded 
that evidence again and again, only to snip it out again; she denied 
having written what she clearly wrote (after she snipped it out, of 
course); she k'lamed that I'd written things I clearly didn't (and she 
failed to back up her k'lames with proof); she stated that zoanthropy 
and transexualism aren't mental illnesses (they are listed in the 
DSM); that the psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as 
such by taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long 
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes a 
mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD" that's 
"been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no proof of this 
k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into admitting her belief 
that gays have suffered "no harm" in living a lifestyle that's given 
19% of them AIDS, causes the gay community to account for 63% of new 
AIDS cases per year (per the CDC) and kills thousands of them per 
year; she stated that liberalism is growing when it's actually in 
decline (and stated that conservatism is dying when it's actually 
growing and has a nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had 
the audacity to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd 
used to prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out 
so badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated 
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when they're 
growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that land ice is 
slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per Nasa's ICESat); 
she stated that global temperature is rising when it's been falling 
for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA, and accounting for the 
revelations that US climate researchers outright falsified the data to 
give the impression that a 90 year cooling trend was actually a 
warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as the driver for global temperature 
change, then quoted a web page that says the exact opposite (the same 
web page, BTW, that I'd used to prove that CO2 lags temperature 
change, proving yet again her loss of reading comprehension)... then 
she *admitted* CO2 lags global temperature change, thereby being 
forced to agree with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the 
driver for global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been 
unable to explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the 
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician, 1 
today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she presented 
examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed were conservative 
(but they turned out to be liberal, socialist or were the result of a 
liberal upbringing); she tried to state that Nazism was a conservative 
political party (it's a form of liberal fascism that takes many of its 
tenets directly from socialism); she failed to provide any proof of 
some of her kooky contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used 
a flawed and biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an 
actual scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist 
herself); she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple 
math; she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he 
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that every 
major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals (when it was 
conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming majority of civil 
rights bills, to the strident opposition of the liberals), she k'lamed 
she knows who I am due to her "kookology experience", "profound 
psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis skills", yet she's thus far 
run from five challenges to out me, for 395 days and counting (ie: she 
doesn't dare provide any of her so-called "proof", for fear that she 
outs the fact that she's kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and 
her loss of reading comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss 
of being able to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she 
was receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the 
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more 
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a 
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not attention-whoring 
for all the boys because her make-believe husband isn't paying enough 
attention to her fat, ugly, delusional ass anymore. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.astronomy

csiph-web