Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Recent Comments
Jeff L. on Analyzing The Western Water Cr… Morgan Wright on Great Lakes Approaching 100% I… Morgan Wright on Great Lakes Set Another Spring… gelcarrion0t on New Visitech Features saveenergy on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014 gelcarrion0t on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014 gelcarrion0t on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast gelcarrion0t on Seventeen Years Of Fun Barbara Stockwell on Nuclear Safety In The US saveenergy on 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV…
My Response To Scientist Barack Obama
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Maybe the democrats will run the Piltdown Man in 2016.
They did in 2008 and 2012.
See, the Anasazi were responsible for the terrible drought. Man has been destroying his environment for centuries. Anasazi levels of CO2 were huge too. 🙂
Mostly methane from pinto beans.
Richard Betts of the MET Office corrected Obama and told him there was no use of the term “dangerous” Cook’s paper. Obama making stuff up in his tweets too. lol
How would he know? Apparently no one tells him anything.
Well the 77 ot of 10000 lower level folks did.
Prepare to be audited by the IRS, who will demand you provide your donor list of Kochs and Exxon execs. Plus, they’ll want to confiscate all your guns before the CIA shows up at 1 am.
As soon as you see a politician or activist appeal to the consensus of expert opinion, as opposed to actual evidence, your bullshit meter should go on high alert.
Climate Change has and always been about big government.
Climate science is the stick to beat the masses and make thim pay up for big society.
No matter what conversation Obama inserts his thoughts into, he is still the most ignorant man in the room.
Wait to see the retraction when someone runs the numbers.
That “97.1%” was out of the percentage of the abstracts expressing a position on AGW, which according to his abstract, was 33.6% (100 – 66.4 that expressed NO position on AGW).
“…We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming…”
The 3%’ers must be the smart ones