Comments on: The Good Ship AGW Is Sinking; Still the Band Plays On

By: James Palmer

James Palmer — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 23:44:15 +0000

You know, burning fuel produce carbon monoxide. Have I missed something or does some atmospheric process convert co to co2?

By: Dan Miller

Dan Miller — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:31:19 +0000

It is a religion, albeit a rather backward one, with all of the accouterments one might expect. There is a priesthood, there are dogmas, and there are cap and trade penances to be purchased. Skeptics are labeled heretics. Although no longer burned at the stake, their writings are banished into oblivion by "peer review."

By: John Q. Public

John Q. Public — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:17:01 +0000

Climategate

Let’s see:

a) subverting the peer review process
b) stacking the UN IPCC
c) obstruction of the Freedom on Information Act
d) breach of university and state ethics codes

… and we haven’t even talked about the data yet.

Climate Science – the new Ponzi scheme!

p.s. – Is this what Science is all about? Meet the new boss (science), same as the old boss (religion). When are they issuing funny hats to scientists?

By: Jeanette

Jeanette — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:08:32 +0000

The “ONE” is going down with the ship and there are no more lifeboats available. Can’t wait until all the corrupt politicians and deceitful scientists sink into oblivion. Thank God for this disclosure, now there’s ammunition to fight the fraud. It will be interesting to watch the AGW religious zealots try to explain this incredible Hoax away.

By: PAthena

PAthena — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:07:48 +0000

“Gavin A. Schmidt, a climatologist at NASA whose e-mail exchanges with colleagues over a variety of climate studies were in the cache. ‘Newton may have been an ass, but the theory of gravity still works.’”
Whether Isaac Newton was an ass or not, it did not affect his argument in the Principia. He was honest, unlike Gavin A. Schmidt and his colleagues.

By: paul_unalaska

paul_unalaska — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 19:48:34 +0000

#37 IdahoCons, I must ask. Which ‘major scientific bodies’ from the aforementioned countries speak of and provide valid representation of AGW?

Any unbiased, non-Government, non-lobbyist funded/persuaded entities would be great…

By: paul_unalaska

paul_unalaska — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 19:41:59 +0000

Science News magazine has an interesting article recently regarding aerosols:

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/48940/title/Aerosols_cloud_the_climate_picture

IMO one of the few periodicals worth paying for the hard copy..

By: paul_unalaska

paul_unalaska — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 19:34:12 +0000

AGW, a faux science equaling the nonsense, accolades the ‘blockbuster’ movie ‘Titanic’ received ~10 years ago..

By: Marc Malone

Marc Malone — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 18:36:54 +0000

Something will indeed smell rotten in Denmark. I thank God that, as usual, Obama will again come home with nothing, after much genuflecting and apologizing. He will abase himself, but his groveling and begging will accrue naught.

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 17:19:43 +0000

Oops, I was mistaken – climate change does in fact exist! It seems that I took the UEA emails totally out of context. Maybe now I’ll look further into my beliefs of conservatism and creationism.

http://enviroknow.com/2009/11/25/climategate-the-swifthack-scandal-what-you-need-to-know/#science
http://www.desmogblog.com/