US college professor demands imprisonment for climate-change deniers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Wavels said:
This whole debate is going to veer into a whole new direction, that of of reality.
There are some lawsuits pending which will force the Alarmists to prove their science in Courts of Law.
I suspect that the purveyors of Alarmist claptrap will be exposed as the genuine "Shills".
We will see in due course.
M. Mann v. Tim Ball in British Columbia will be fascinating and revealing, not to mention downright entertaining.
The other suit is M. Mann v. M. Steyn in the District of Columbia. If this one gets to court, it should be a real treat.
Click to expand...
I wonder if it'll go any better for Tball this time around...

"In response, Ball filed a lawsuit against Johnson. Ball's representation in the case was provided by Fraser Milner Casgrain. Johnson's statement of defense was provided by the Calgary Herald, which stated that Ball "...never had a reputation in the scientific community as a noted climatologist and authority on global warming," and that he "...is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist." In the ensuing court case, Ball acknowledged that he had only been a professor for eight years, and that his doctorate was not in climatology but rather in geography, and subsequently withdrew the lawsuit on June 8, 2007."
 
Wavels

Wavels

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
I wonder if it'll go any better for Tball this time around...

"In response, Ball filed a lawsuit against Johnson. Ball's representation in the case was provided by Fraser Milner Casgrain. Johnson's statement of defense was provided by the Calgary Herald, which stated that Ball "...never had a reputation in the scientific community as a noted climatologist and authority on global warming," and that he "...is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist." In the ensuing court case, Ball acknowledged that he had only been a professor for eight years, and that his doctorate was not in climatology but rather in geography, and subsequently withdrew the lawsuit on June 8, 2007."
Click to expand...
As I mentioned, we will see how this unfolds. That was then this is now. Wholly different suit
I have to admit that these tempests of contention intrigue and amuse me. LOL.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
"Tomorrow the Heartland Institute launches a new report Climate Change Reconsidered. To write the report, Heartland assembled a group it calls the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), a particularly revealing choice of name. The name, combined with the timing of the release to coincide with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s upcoming Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), shows that Heartland is attempting to present itself as a legitimate alternative authority to the IPCC.

However, the Heartland institute is nowhere close to the IPCC in terms of credibility. A few key points show the NIPCC to be a transparent marketing gimmick rather than a legitimate scientific undertaking:

-The NIPCC does not follow the same rigorous scientific evaluation process as the IPCC.
-The Heartland Institute has a long history of opposing settled science in the interests of its free-market funders, and has used decidedly un-scientific tactics to do so."

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/09/09/heartland-institute-nipcc-fail-the-credibility-test/
 
Wavels

Wavels

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
"Tomorrow the Heartland Institute launches a new report Climate Change Reconsidered. To write the report, Heartland assembled a group it calls the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), a particularly revealing choice of name. The name, combined with the timing of the release to coincide with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s upcoming Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), shows that Heartland is attempting to present itself as a legitimate alternative authority to the IPCC.

However, the Heartland institute is nowhere close to the IPCC in terms of credibility. A few key points show the NIPCC to be a transparent marketing gimmick rather than a legitimate scientific undertaking:

-The NIPCC does not follow the same rigorous scientific evaluation process as the IPCC.
-The Heartland Institute has a long history of opposing settled science in the interests of its free-market funders, and has used decidedly un-scientific tactics to do so."

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/09/09/heartland-institute-nipcc-fail-the-credibility-test/
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, for you alarmist groupies, The NIPCC is gaining traction. This combined with the growing apathy of voting populations responding to the shrill hysteria and bogus science have rendered the hand wringing ACC acolytes increasingly impotent and irrelevant.

The tide of reason and perception has turned against you guys...the end is near, take heed, and duck and cover!
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
if conservatives worked this hard just to spin things or pseudo (IPCC v NIPCC)..think of the REAL good they can do by understanding the world has changed and everything around them..they need to get with the program or they will be lost..remember those people who refused to use a PC?:mrgreen:
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Wavels said:
Unfortunately, for you alarmist groupies, The NIPCC is gaining traction. This combined with the growing apathy of voting populations responding to the shrill hysteria and bogus science have rendered the hand wringing ACC acolytes increasingly impotent and irrelevant.

The tide of reason and perception has turned against you guys...the end is near, take heed, and duck and cover!
Click to expand...
..where?

 
Wavels

Wavels

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
..where?

Click to expand...

Good luck with that.

As mentioned, you chicken little types NEED political support in order to achieve your grandiose goals of humongous spigots of money gushing forth.
It seems to me that the "game is over".
The fat lady is not only warming up, she has, indeed, taken the stage.

What do you think the ramifications and reverberations will be, if, and when Mann loses his lawsuits?
Can you say curtains?

Now that's entertainment, baby!:mrgreen:
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Wavels said:
Good luck with that.

As mentioned, you chicken little types NEED political support in order to achieve your grandiose goals of humongous spigots of money gushing forth.
It seems to me that the "game is over".
The fat lady is not only warming up, she has, indeed, taken the stage.

What do you think the ramifications and reverberations will be, if, and when Mann loses his lawsuits?
Can you say curtains?

Now that's entertainment, baby!:mrgreen:
Click to expand...
"Looking at the bigger picture: The obsession among contrarians and denialists with trying to overthrow climate science by discrediting seminal early paleoclimate research by Mann and his colleagues in the 1990s is about politics, not science. Paleoclimate research has continued to advance during the past 15 years. Mann and numerous other researchers have continued to add to the peer-reviewed scientific literature, and here's where things stand as of the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report, issued last year:


For average annual [Northern Hemisphere] temperatures, the period 1983–2012 was very likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 800 years (high confidence) and likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 1400 years (medium confidence). This is supported by comparison of instrumental temperatures with multiple reconstructions from a variety of proxy data and statistical methods, and is consistent with AR4.


--IPCC AR5, Working Group I, Paleoclimate chapter, p. 386"

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2014/02/25/setting-the-record-straight-on-misleading-claims-against-michael-mann/

Mann will win, you will cry and likely deny it and claim another reaching conspiracy theory
 
Wavels

Wavels

Well-Known Member
Well as I have stated, and will now reiterate;

We will see. The pending lawsuits have yet to be litigated.

You may very well be in for an awkward comeuppance.

Do you follow the political news with any degree of seriousness?
Things are looming against the potential success of Mr. Mann.

Do I have to come back there and point them out to you?
:roll:
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Wavels said:
Well as I have stated, and will now reiterate;

We will see. The pending lawsuits have yet to be litigated.

You may very well be in for an awkward comeuppance.

Do you follow the political news with any degree of seriousness?
Things are looming against the potential success of Mr. Mann.

Do I have to come back there and point them out to you?
:roll:
Click to expand...
You've already proved you get your information from biased sources, not objective ones, and you deny anything that contradicts them.

Quote me, Mann will win if it comes down to it

Will you accept it?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Wavels said:
We will all see how this pans out. Time will expose the posers.
Click to expand...
time already has exposed the heartland institute that you so heavily rely on.

or are you also a "harmful effects of smoking" denier?

:lol:

learn from history rather than copying and pasting half of the internet onto one post, you fucking dumbass.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
"Tomorrow the Heartland Institute launches a new report Climate Change Reconsidered. To write the report, Heartland assembled a group it calls the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), a particularly revealing choice of name. The name, combined with the timing of the release to coincide with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s upcoming Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), shows that Heartland is attempting to present itself as a legitimate alternative authority to the IPCC.

However, the Heartland institute is nowhere close to the IPCC in terms of credibility. A few key points show the NIPCC to be a transparent marketing gimmick rather than a legitimate scientific undertaking:

-The NIPCC does not follow the same rigorous scientific evaluation process as the IPCC.
-The Heartland Institute has a long history of opposing settled science in the interests of its free-market funders, and has used decidedly un-scientific tactics to do so."

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/09/09/heartland-institute-nipcc-fail-the-credibility-test/
Click to expand...
goddamn, waffles is so fucking dumb.

maybe he can copy and paste something else to make it all better.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Wavels said:
Unfortunately, for you alarmist groupies, The NIPCC is gaining traction. This combined with the growing apathy of voting populations responding to the shrill hysteria and bogus science have rendered the hand wringing ACC acolytes increasingly impotent and irrelevant.

The tide of reason and perception has turned against you guys...the end is near, take heed, and duck and cover!
Click to expand...
dude, they're the heartland institute. how dumb are you?
 
Wavels

Wavels

Well-Known Member
Hysterical, hyperventilation and mindless name calling seem to be the only mode of communication you are even remotely qualified for.

The chickens are circling your abode and looking for a place to roost.
Patience my shrill and incoherent sputtering apoplectic little friend.
You have lots of raw and vulnerable exposed nerves. Too easy.
This is fun
All will be revealed in the fullness of time.
And I gently remind your enraged majesty of gibberish, you have been warned.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Wavels said:
Hysterical, hyperventilation and mindless name calling seem to be the only mode of communication you are even remotely qualified for.

The chickens are circling your abode and looking for a place to roost.
Patience my shrill and incoherent sputtering apoplectic little friend.
You have lots of raw and vulnerable exposed nerves. Too easy.
This is fun
All will be revealed in the fullness of time.
And I gently remind your enraged majesty of gibberish, you have been warned.
Click to expand...


LOL. THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE.

a
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
quite literally the same people who denied the harmful effects of smoking (because they were paid to) are now denying AGW (because they are paid to) and this is who the retarded waffle looks to.

you simply can not fix stupid or force people to learn from history.

the funniest part is how convinced the retarded waffle seems to be about all of this, just like beenthere and company were with respect to the unskewed polling nonsense.

how is it so easy to dupe morons like the waffle?
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
"Tomorrow the Heartland Institute launches a new report Climate Change Reconsidered. To write the report, Heartland assembled a group it calls the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), a particularly revealing choice of name. The name, combined with the timing of the release to coincide with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s upcoming Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), shows that Heartland is attempting to present itself as a legitimate alternative authority to the IPCC.

However, the Heartland institute is nowhere close to the IPCC in terms of credibility. A few key points show the NIPCC to be a transparent marketing gimmick rather than a legitimate scientific undertaking:

-The NIPCC does not follow the same rigorous scientific evaluation process as the IPCC.
-The Heartland Institute has a long history of opposing settled science in the interests of its free-market funders, and has used decidedly un-scientific tactics to do so."

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/09/09/heartland-institute-nipcc-fail-the-credibility-test/
Click to expand...
No it show they are adopting the tactics of the Saganists. The IPCC is a bunch of fakers as I have pointed out chapter and verse. But, the teach us the real fight.

You guys changed from methane to carbon, AGW to ACC.

It is always funny to see what gains the scorn of the silly people. And what the silly people don't see is the oh so silly in themselves.

It is a fight where you thought the facts would come later and you could win the fight now.

See? Little David the Denier, doesn't bother with bravado insults and put downs. That is Goliath bragging big and spending the tax payers' cash.

David puts Big Goliath down with a hard and heavy reasoning to the forehead, not a bunch of hand waving and girlish insults.

But, since you have no facts, girl fight is all you have.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
lol, the heartland institute.
Click to expand...
Girl fight. Act like all shit is just shit. But, your shit is the good shit.

Girl fight bullshit. You have no facts. Forget the messengers. Shoot them all in the heartland. You have no facts. You think the oceans are rising by the 1/2 inch. Centimeters per year!!!!

It is by the fingernail shaving if at all. Millimeters. You are totally bamboozled. You have no facts.

And what, now? You are also a victim of the tobacco industry, big boy? I know when the Surgeon General put that warning on tobacco.

And the DEMs by the way, run the big tobacco states. So, what the hell happened to you? The warning was there when you were born.

So, what is the big lie you have now, Mr Victim? You could not read the warning label?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top