East Coasters Might Want A Word With John Boehner
Even as Hurricane Sandy cleanup continues, the House leader says he has no interest in fighting climate changes:
Mr. Boehner’s words, which appear to mischaracterize the scientific debate on global warming, indicate that blinkered Republican opposition to doing much of anything about the problem may persist.
8 comments:
Doing nothing about what "problem?"
Didn't temperatures peak in about '98?
In case anyone was wondering.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html
Didn't temperatures peak in about '98?
No.
But your dedication to denial is truly impressive.
See the above link and please don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion.
Sorry to make you look so foolish again.
See my link and don't let the facts get in the way of YOUR opinion.
Seriously, you cite the DAILY MAIL? LOL. Meanwhile, my link actually goes to the scientific center producing the data.
Besides, David Rose's article was "pre-bunked":
http://www.skepticalscience.com/misleading-daily-mail-prebunked-nuccitelli-et-al-2012.html
You make yourself look foolish enough and don't actually need much help from me.
And you are quoting a Global warming anti-skepticism website. Talk about a hypocritical comment about sources...
https://www2.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/news/2011/noaa_globaltemp_2010.jpg
and another...
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/04/some-global-warming-qa-to-consider-in-light-of-the-epa-ruling/
NOAA.. Looks like it is 98 or maybe 2005 to me.
Global warming kooks sure have a tough time explaining 1940-80 as well. One of the bigger industrial periods in the world, unregulated global pollution and still the temps are lower or scattered at best.
Were you born in the 70s when the educators were telling us to watch out for the coming ice age... after all, it was based on science.
BTW - I personally hope it does get warmer.
Perhaps you can rely on Snopes.com or maybe even Politifact for your next source.
Yeah, your first link goes an unexplained chart with no data that kind of indicates a WARMING TREND.
And Roy Spencer? LMFAO:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer
The Skeptical Science site actual uses data, and all that sciencey stuff, to debunk the crazies like Roy Spencer and the Daily Mail crap.
I know you'll just scoff at the RationalWIki link, but when your rebuttals are links to tabloids or ID cranks like Spencer, You really aren't helping your case here. Perhaps you should move on. There's a post about Charlie Sykes up higher!
Perhaps you can rely on Snopes.com or maybe even Politifact for your next source.
...says the guy who linked to a DAILY MAIL article.
Post a Comment