Global warming, unlike WMDs in Iraq, does exist. Propagandists paid for by the big energy companies would like you to believe different. That’s why every aricle on global warming is met with ready-made cut-and-paste “rebuttals”.
It’s funny, because many of the same people who call the scientic study of climate change “speculation” and “alarminst” have no problem accepting speculative theories about the Iraq war (“if we don’t fight them over there they will follow us here”, etc.)
Supporting the Iraq war means supporting war profiteering, death and destruction. Supporting a greener environment means supporting a more sustainable future but, alas, less profit for major corporations. It is the fear of these reduced profits which makes global warming such a big issue, inspiring the cut-and-paste “rebuttals”. Keep ’em coming guys, and I’ll find some of my own to post.
Why have you changed the topic to Iraq? Is it toime for us to bringb up Monica Lewinski?
Why not refute ONE THING that I have posted? So what if it is cut and pasted? Am I supposed to make stuff up off the top of my head? I gave you my sources. Is it easier to blow smoke than disprove these scientists you slander?
Please refute these articles, AND prove your accusation that their authors are shills, or you are no better than that lying stalinist yayhoo Algore.
More and more reputable scientists are questioning this theory. Of course they are reputable until they disagree with alarmists like yourself. Then they are right wing nut cases.
Spend it on global warming research? No.
Buy “Carbon Credits”? No.
Invest in “green companies.” No.
Buy an enviromentally friendly Prius for his son? No.
Buy more advertising to try and brain wash the world. YES
Quote from AP:
Shortly after the announcement, he pledged to donate his share of the $1.5 million prize money to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a bipartisan nonprofit organization that is devoted to changing public opinion worldwide about the urgency of solving the climate crisis.
I really question the motivation of you guys. Are you all scientists? Is that why you’re so interested in global warming? Or, more likley, have you all been brainwashed by the talking points spoon fed to you by Rush, Fox News, etc.? What exactly do have have to gain by discouraging environmentally friendly ideas and policies?
Now for my cut-and-paste of the day:
Scientists know with virtual certainty that:
Human activities are changing the composition of Earth’s atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.
An “unequivocal” warming trend of about 1.0 to 1.7°F occurred from 1906-2005. Warming occurred in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and over the oceans (IPCC, 2007).
The major greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries. It is therefore virtually certain that atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will continue to rise over the next few decades.
Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet.
Rebublican playbook, page 1: attack the messenger. That’s why you guys are so eager to smear Al Gore. Questioning his motivation to donate the money to a nonprofit is ridiculous. What exactly is Al’s evil plan here, to help preserve the environment for future generations? The nerve of him!
Go Al, get busy, it’s your birthday, it’s your birthday!
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Global warming, unlike WMDs in Iraq, does exist. Propagandists paid for by the big energy companies would like you to believe different. That’s why every aricle on global warming is met with ready-made cut-and-paste “rebuttals”.
It’s funny, because many of the same people who call the scientic study of climate change “speculation” and “alarminst” have no problem accepting speculative theories about the Iraq war (“if we don’t fight them over there they will follow us here”, etc.)
Supporting the Iraq war means supporting war profiteering, death and destruction. Supporting a greener environment means supporting a more sustainable future but, alas, less profit for major corporations. It is the fear of these reduced profits which makes global warming such a big issue, inspiring the cut-and-paste “rebuttals”. Keep ’em coming guys, and I’ll find some of my own to post.
Go Al!!!!
Excuse – he won?? Has anyone checked out the stats on his home? He should know that the solution starts at home–.
Why have you changed the topic to Iraq? Is it toime for us to bringb up Monica Lewinski?
Why not refute ONE THING that I have posted? So what if it is cut and pasted? Am I supposed to make stuff up off the top of my head? I gave you my sources. Is it easier to blow smoke than disprove these scientists you slander?
Please refute these articles, AND prove your accusation that their authors are shills, or you are no better than that lying stalinist yayhoo Algore.
I am anxiously awaiting your answers to Willy’s questions.
More and more reputable scientists are questioning this theory. Of course they are reputable until they disagree with alarmists like yourself. Then they are right wing nut cases.
Spend it on global warming research? No.
Buy “Carbon Credits”? No.
Invest in “green companies.” No.
Buy an enviromentally friendly Prius for his son? No.
Buy more advertising to try and brain wash the world. YES
Quote from AP:
Shortly after the announcement, he pledged to donate his share of the $1.5 million prize money to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a bipartisan nonprofit organization that is devoted to changing public opinion worldwide about the urgency of solving the climate crisis.
And if he did do all of those things, you would be tossing allegations of selfishness. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
If you remain unconvinced, go here and cash in: http://www.junkscience.com
If you think it’s a no-brainer that humans are causing catastrophic global warming, here’s your opportunity to earn an easy US $125,000.00!
That’s right, the prize money has increased as we seek warming advocates’ price threshold!
The prize has gone unclaimed for 67 days!
I really question the motivation of you guys. Are you all scientists? Is that why you’re so interested in global warming? Or, more likley, have you all been brainwashed by the talking points spoon fed to you by Rush, Fox News, etc.? What exactly do have have to gain by discouraging environmentally friendly ideas and policies?
Now for my cut-and-paste of the day:
Scientists know with virtual certainty that:
Human activities are changing the composition of Earth’s atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.
An “unequivocal” warming trend of about 1.0 to 1.7°F occurred from 1906-2005. Warming occurred in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and over the oceans (IPCC, 2007).
The major greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries. It is therefore virtually certain that atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will continue to rise over the next few decades.
Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet.
Rebublican playbook, page 1: attack the messenger. That’s why you guys are so eager to smear Al Gore. Questioning his motivation to donate the money to a nonprofit is ridiculous. What exactly is Al’s evil plan here, to help preserve the environment for future generations? The nerve of him!
Go Al, get busy, it’s your birthday, it’s your birthday!
This is getting to be too much for me! I’m going to go have a beer! Hasta la vista…..baby!