calfoxwc Posted November 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/11/29/skeptical-climate-documentary-set-to-rock-un-climate-summit-film-to-have-red-carpet-premiere-in-paris/ http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/616937/GLOBAL-COOLING-Decade-long-ice-age-predicted-as-sun-hibernates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 cuz fuck the scientific community. Man, climatologists must be frustrated as fuck. They do all of this research, then the climate gets politicized and the dumbass public just eats it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 cuz fuck the scientific community. Man, climatologists must be frustrated as fuck. They do all of this research, then the climate gets politicized and the dumbass public just eats it up At least they're still allowed. Give it a republican president/congress and there'll be a ban on it like gun research at the CDC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 once again, running mouths without reading the article. Featuring interviews and comments from more than 30 renowned scientists and climate experts, Read more: http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/11/29/skeptical-climate-documentary-set-to-rock-un-climate-summit-film-to-have-red-carpet-premiere-in-paris/#ixzz3sz8R7PDW Now, it was really STUPID to smart off about "f the scientific community" Sure, it only involves 30. Why reject their expertise? Everybody else with any common sense knows why - "majority rules only when it's to liberals' advantage"... Thanks for stopping in on another thread and making a woodypeckerhead ass of yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 Please, point to an example where there is scientific consensus saying something and liberals are disagreeing, I'll be happy to discuss it. And please be careful about the criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 consensus does not mean "fact". And, Chris, it's a whole bunch of bs to say this: "At least they're still allowed. Give it a republican president/congress and there'll be a ban on it like gun research at the CDC." So, the current leftist extremist marxist sumbeech regime, and the UN, can fund climate change research, and that's okay. But any funding by anybody else, when the funding does not support mmgw... is very bad and partisan. My, that is certainly politically expedient. Why the hell should our currently leftist ObaMao anti gun regime be allowed to direct his CDC to do anti gun studies? Seriously, that is so intellectually dishonest, you've stooped to woody's ignorant level of incompetence. So, funding of gun violence and mmgw studies, are only allowed to be funded by anti -gun and pro mmgw groups and presidential regimes. And you wonder why I keep talking about the dishonest trends of liberals emotional knee jerking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 So no examples of liberals defying scientific consensus? OK. I wasn't too hopeful on that front. The ban on CDC gun research has been in place for a long time, it's not just an Obama thing, in fact it was passed in to law midway through the Clinton administration, in 1997 - with a republican congress. If republicans were so concerned that a 'corrupt liberal brainwashing' president would fix the results to how he/she wanted, they could have lifted the ban when bush came in to power, and thrown government money at trying to find a solution to the problem of gun violence. But that didn't happen. I'm not sure why you think *only* research done by the UN is admissible in regards to global warming? Any independent research is worth consideration, and if the findings can be corroborated by others it will be entered in to the general discussion. I think, however, it's fairly obvious why we should be skeptical about research funded by fossil fuel companies - they stand to lose billions if there's legislation restricting the usage of fossil fuels and will throw as much money as they can at people until they find a study they like. A little bit like in the good old days with lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 Or tobacco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted December 1, 2015 Report Share Posted December 1, 2015 http://www.weatherbell.com/saturday-summary-november-28-2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted December 1, 2015 Report Share Posted December 1, 2015 http://www.weatherbell.com/saturday-summary-november-28-2015 Solid contribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 The ban on CDC gun research has been in place for a long time, it's not just an Obama thing, in fact it was passed in to law midway through the Clinton administration, in 1997 - with a republican congress. If republicans were so concerned that a 'corrupt liberal brainwashing' president would fix the results to how he/she wanted, they could have lifted the ban when bush came in to power, and thrown government money at trying to find a solution to the problem of gun violence. But that didn't happen. This is no longer the case. The ban was lifted nearly 3 years ago after sandy hook. The reason it's not news essentially justifies the ban in the first place. The results refute in nearly every conceivable manner the "gun control" narrative. http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/ (And yes the article contains a link to the actual study). Good article from Time: http://flip.it/V_-SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.