AGW

‘The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering.’

Advertisements

20 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 14:36:37

    Reply

  2. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 14:38:05

    Reply

  3. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 14:38:18

    Reply

  4. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 15:19:30

    Know-it-all bureaucrats insist that foisting millions of mercury-laden fluorescent tubes on the public is going to be good for the planet. The public obviously does not agree. Voting with their wallets, people have overwhelming favored warm, nontoxic lighting options over their pale curlicue imitators. Beginning Jan. 1, Obama administration extremists will impose massive financial penalties on any company daring to produce a lighting product that fully satisfies ordinary Americans.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/26/time-to-stock-up-on-light-bulbs/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS

    Reply

  5. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 15:20:40

    Injury from stepping on CFL lightbulb (GRUESOME IMAGE WARNING)

    http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=71917

    Reply

    • Sherry
      Nov 27, 2011 @ 20:06:38

      In reading the comments the problem with the foot is not from mercury but from a bacteria. The biggest concern would be from breathing the fumes of these bulbs upon breakage-not good neurologically. 😯

      Here is my concern-these types of bulbs cause migraines. To have to work under such bulbs is bad enough but to have to come home to this kind of lighting-that is suffering! 😡

      Reply

  6. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 16:24:15

    O/T but oh so funny!!

    Reply

  7. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 17:10:59

    The Climategate 2.0 emails are proving to be a treasure trove of confirmatory evidence for things we “deniers” have long suspected known.

    Ace beat me to the punch on the BBC story (that used to be the first part of this post). But is finding the media aligned with a lefty pet cause really that shocking?

    What may be more surprising to some, however, is the participation of big business in this scam. On the surface, it would seem that they’d be staunchly in opposition since they frequently find themselves in the crosshairs of anti-CO2 measures like Kyoto. But not so much.

    http://minx.cc/?post=324129

    Reply

    • Kim
      Nov 27, 2011 @ 17:12:07

      DuPont is one of many companies that has engaged in the process of “greenwashing” its business. They’re not an eeeevillll, polluting chemical company anymore, and they spun off that icky Remington Arms Co. nearly 20 years ago. Now they’re a trusted steward of Gaia, contributing to environmental causes and committed to saving the planet. I mean, they still make all those chemicals … but they do it with a heart.

      And DuPont is a master at this. Back when the ozone hole was the new hotness, guess who was arguing in support of the Montreal Protocol that banned Freon, among other CFCs? As luck would have it, DuPont just happened to have a replacement waiting in the wings.

      Reply

  8. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 17:12:59

    A good list of fellow bullshit artists can be found here: U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP).

    http://www.us-cap.org/

    Reply

    • Kim
      Nov 27, 2011 @ 17:13:35

      We know the cost of such legislation would run into the trillions of dollars, so why would they do such a thing? Because those trillions come out of your pocket, with many finding a home in theirs, that’s why.

      Reply

  9. Kim
    Nov 27, 2011 @ 17:35:33

    Reply

  10. Kim
    Nov 28, 2011 @ 09:27:01

    The new release of emails was timed to coincide with the second anniversary of the original climategate leak and with the upcoming United Nations climate summit in Durban, South Africa. And it has already stirred strong emotions. To Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass.), for example, the leaker or leakers responsible are attempting to “sabotage the international climate talks” and should be identified and brought “to justice.”

    One might sympathize with Mr. Markey’s outrage if, say, the emails were maliciously rewritten or invented. But at least one scientist involved—Mr. Mann—has confirmed that the emails are genuine, as were the first batch released two years ago. So any malfeasance revealed therein ought to be blamed on the scientists who wrote them, rather than on the whistleblower who exposed them.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204452104577059830626002226.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

    Reply

    • Kim
      Nov 28, 2011 @ 09:27:51

      The sensible way to do so is to prove Mr. McIntyre wrong using facts and evidence and improved data. Instead the email reveals Mr. Mann casting about for a way to smear him. If the case for man-made global warming is really as strong as the so-called consensus claims it is, why do the climategate emails show scientists attempting to stamp out dissenting points of view? Why must they manipulate data, such as Mr. Jones’s infamous effort (revealed in the first batch of climategate emails) to “hide the decline,” deliberately concealing an inconvenient divergence, post-1960, between real-world, observed temperature data and scientists’ preferred proxies derived from analyzing tree rings?

      Reply

  11. Kim
    Nov 28, 2011 @ 12:34:50

    Global-warming skeptics spend much of their time knocking down the fatuous warmist claim that the science is settled. According to the warmists, this singular piece of settled science is attested to by hundreds or thousands of highly credentialed scientists. In truth, virtually the entire warmist edifice is built around a small, tightly knit coterie of persons (one hesitates to refer to folks with so little respect for the scientific method as scientists) willing to falsify data and manipulate findings; or, to put it bluntly, to lie in order to push a political agenda not supported by empirical evidence.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/284137/scientists-behaving-badly-jim-lacey

    Reply

  12. Sherry
    Nov 28, 2011 @ 22:49:39

    Why do we have liberals and progressives?

    Our liberal and progressive friends have been demoralized-there is no convincing them of the truth until its too late. 😦

    Reply

  13. Kim
    Nov 29, 2011 @ 09:48:47

    The UN’s so-called “expert” also made the standard calls for radical redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/11/28/un-expert-warns-failure-to-secure-climate-change-deal-could-lead-to-war/

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: