BoJester

Wrong 72% of the time regarding c*****e c****e. The so-called bright broads at faux are just as bad as their male caunterparts. They all tell wh**ever lie roger ailes gives them to spew.

However the fools at faux may be more accurate than the lies that fat limburg and the savage weiner feed their i***t audiences daily.


http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/07/3423224/cable-news-accuracy-climate-science/

Hartbreaker

Typical liberal survey. First you make up a t***h. Then you push it. And then you call people i***ts when they don't believe your lies. The same people who pushed g****l w*****g went before the UN and told them to prepare for a mini ice age. But still you accept their contradictory words as fact.

Had enough

Is there a reason for your name calling? I was hoping after our discussion where you opened up some and spoke how you felt without name calling was a really good start for sharing our opinions. Regardless what others think of you I would like to think maybe we could be friends. Your opinions are quite similar to mine. I am an independent after spending most of my life as a republican. I'm 60 and disabled. I have 3 children with the youngest just about to move out. I live in Az outside of Phx.. I really love my Country and am a huge fan of the military, in fact I live near an Air Force base. I absolutely love fighter jets. How about you??? I'm white and a Christian. I don't h**e anyone until they give me a reason.

BoJester

I probably could be friendly with you, however regarding the unpleasent name calling, do you read the daily crap posted by old fool, d**eboy, looky, tazmanian, vermins, braindamaged, pee pee hole, and bowel movement and the dogpile?

They constantly bash the president, make stupid, r****t and ignorant claims about the first lady, and name call and attack every liberal, progressive or moderate poster here.

So apparently, the vitriol and attack is the preferred form of entertainment for all of the above.
Because if they kept their crap out of the posts and repsonses, the other side would as well.

Think about it

Had enough

The fighting and name calling has been on both sides. I joined another political site and was called every thing you could imagine. Actually the pure hatred rather frightened me. My computer was hacked by one of the liberals. The guy left me his assumed name to find. I found myself calling others names. I won't lie I did it. I started feeling miserable all the time so I left that site. We all need to find a way to come back together. There are very serious problems coming and we must join as one to stop the things or America is gone. Every single person here needs to say enough!! We can find common ground and we need to do it now!!!

Bogey Time

________________________________________________

The only 100% t***h in c*****e c****e is that is all a big lie!!!!

cold iron Loc: White House

:thumbdown: :thumbdown:
You are so full of s**t that your eyes are brown. Get a life, no one buys your crap. Come up with some real information.

Retired669

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Retired669

Wasn't you running a firewall of some sorts to keep from being hacked? I've never heard of that happening to anyone unless they pissed the hacker group anonymous off.

BoJester

Conservatard teabag assholes always start with the personal attack and name calling when they are afraid of the t***h, or are too stupid to accept it.

dbleach3

The following qoute is included for you information" Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore testified before a Senate committee this week (week of 2/17/14), admitting that any link between human emissions and g****l w*****g is dubious at best: "There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth's atmosphere over the past 100 years." He added, "Today, we live in an unusually cold period in the history of life on earth and there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be anything but beneficial for humans and the majority of other species. There is ample reason to believe that a sharp cooling of the climate would bring disastrous results for human civilization."

Carbon Dioxide is a nutrient. The sun controls our climate. The polls and studies that are referenced always refer to 97% or some large number of scientists polled; they never indicate how many of the scientists were meteorologists.
And don't forget the they lied and falsified temperaturs some years ago. And they admitted that hockey stick crap was just that crap.

docwill

Jester, as usual, references a L*****t political site and a L*****t science org. which allow zero argument (because the 'consensus' says "it's over" don'tchaknow) and substitutes infantile insults for critical thought.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/

If you want an authority on data analysis, try Burt Rutan:

http://rps3.com/Files/AGW/EngrCritique.AGW-Science.v4.3.pdf

Your frauds have been covered-up and the "studies," esp. IPCC, are political contrivances.

btw, wanta know where some temperature monitors are placed?

http://www.surfacestations.org/odd_sites.htm

In Paso Robles CA where summer temps. top 100', a ground-level monitor was placed at the intersection of the two busiest downtown streets.

L*****ts are frauds...

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

The opposition to c*****e c****e/g****l w*****g amazes me. On two levels at least.

97% of scientists accept it as fact, 3% of scientists do not. Only Trotsky would demand and expect that his followers accept the word of 3% and follow and work in that direction.

Secondly, what is the downside of trying to stop or slow the event. If we do decrease carbon footprints and nothing happens, what is the bad part.

Also, the above would be hard to prove, if we predict an event, do what we can to stop that event, and the event does not happen, is it because we stopped it or that it would never have happened? In that case you cons could stir everything the way you wish it to be and come up smelling of roses..

docwill

[\quote=permafrost]

97% of scientists accept it as fact, 3% of scientists do not. Only Trotsky would demand and expect that his followers accept the word of 3% and follow and work in that direction.

Secondly, what is the downside of trying to stop or slow the event. If we do decrease carbon footprints and nothing happens, what is the bad part.

Also, the above would be hard to prove, if we predict an event..[/quote]

Did you read the links? The costs to U.S. taxpayers is never-ending trillions while India and China do little.

Extraordinary claims involving extraordinary costs demand extraordinary proof. The "Warmists'" credibility doe justify compulsory
co-operation..

docwill

[\quote=permafrost]

97% of scientists accept it as fact, 3% of scientists

Secondly, what is the downside of trying to stop or slow the event. If we do decrease carbon footprints and nothing happens, what is the bad part.

Also, the above would be hard to prove, if we predict an event..[/quote]

Did you read the links? The costs to U.S. taxpayers is never-ending trillions while India and China do little.

Extraordinary claims involving extraordinary costs demand extraordinary proof. The "Warmists'" credibility do not justify compulsory
co-operation..