Global Warming - 2 German cargo ships pass through 'Arctic Passage'

Looks like the gullible drone Shawn Clark, who accepted the AGW fraud perpetrated in 1988, has failed to make even one mental inquiry into why temperatures have been on the decline for a decade, relying, rather, on others to misguide him.

 

Maybe Sarah Palin farted up there amd melted some ice. LOL. That would be another logical explanation.

Seriously, something is clearly happening with temperature, and the first place you see it is in the polar regions. What's important is ice melting on land up there--like in Greenland--because that's the melted ice that will raise the sea level and eventually put the East coast under water.

 

You can always tell what frightens leftists/statists/small minds the most - they attempt to ridicule and attack it. Sarah Palin is a case in point.

Think critically for a moment and explain why there was no global catastrophe the last time Greenland was green - when it was colonized by the vikings. Obviously, there was less ice there, indicating warmer temperatures than today. So, the alarmism and hype are clearly just that. The earth flourishes during warmer periods and ice ages are the real threat.

Most importantly, there is no (non-manufactured) evidence that we are warmer today than when Greenland was green. There is also no empirical evidence that anthropogenic CO2 causes global warming.

Seriously, here is what scientists thought just a few decades ago:

 

I'll refrain from name calling - why don't you?

Greenland was not green. Never mind that local weather should not be used to suggest global climate change. Stop perpetuating myths.

Are you kidding? It's already been demonstrated that CO2 accounts for 9-26% of the earth's greenhouse effect. And anthropogenic CO2 has already raised the earth's CO2 levels from ~280ppm to 380ppm+.

Great - now you're falling for what a few scientists thought (because of particulate pollution) and the media widely hyped, when there was no scientific consensus of "global cooling" at all.

Come on - you could at least try to avoid repeating the most common denialist's claims and wasting everyone's time.

 

Forum troll ufourya repeating the same old lies. What's new?

 

I thought about replying to this in detail, but I can see it would be a complete waste of time. I'll just suggest you tweak your own declaration, substitute 'people like uforya' for 'humans' and truncate after 'problem', friend.

Question for you then... Are you like George Bush who believes on Wednesday what he believed on Monday regardless what happened on Tuesday?

 

You add nothing of substance, friend. Why should I answer your question while you ignore mine?

 

I will respond in kind to comments.

Greenland was, despite being mostly covered in ice, colonized and farmed for a few hundred years. Several theories are put forward in explanation for the demise of the settlements, the most reasonable being a decline in temperature after the global warming of the Medieval Warm Period and the onset of the Little Ice Age. The colonization is not a myth, rather a well known fact.

Although the Vikings could not know it, their movement north during the Medieval Warm Period of AD 1000-1400 represented a pattern that had occurred many times before in the human past. Throughout prehistory and history, peoples have shifted their range northward in response to improved climates. Conversely, they have sometimes retreated from higher latitudes during phases of colder climate. http://rutgerspress.rutgers.edu/Author/Hoffecker_Prehistory/excerpt.html

Yes, I inadvertantly made a false statement about CO2. I left out the important word 'catastrphic,' as in catastropnic global warming. There is no debate about whether the CO2 levels have risen, but whether that rise is of grave concern.

I posted the video solely to demonstrate that 'scientists' make statements that turn out to be incorrect all the time. Just a few decades ago some scientists were making predictions of a new ice age. Today some scientists are making predictions of catastrophic warming. There is no reason to believe them now. The entire global warming charade is based on two things along with the belief that the earth's climate is/was a stable system.

#1 Temperatures have risen in unprecedented fashion recently.
#2 THe increase is due mainly to anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Neither of these things can be shown to be true. Indeed, the papers published by IPCC scientists to mitigate the MWP and LIA while exaggerating 20th century temperatures have very recently been shown to have serious problems. Problems so serious that other scientists are declaring them fraudulent and the peer review process concerning them fatally flawed.
Ross McKitrick: Defects in key climate data are uncovered - Full Comment

So called evidence for #2 is based solely on computer models designed for one purpose - to show the theoretical effects of different levels of CO2 upon global warming, while ignoring other potentially more influential factors - uh, like the sun.

The denialists, as you name-call them, have the superior case and the increasing amout of evidence on their side. There is no 'consensus.' Sorry, welcome to reality.

 

You know, that's how I should have responded! Thanks for the suggestion, friend.

 

I never said otherwise. Again - using southern Greenland in the Medieval Warm Period as being somewhat habitable proves nothing about global climate.

I don't see anyone arguing that the Earth's climate is stable over long periods of time. I do see people saying that unprecedented rises in CO2 and temperature over the past 150 years present a significant thread to the way of life on Earth as we know it.

Your whole argument is based on one supposedly faulty data set. Never mind that there are plenty of other data sets which cooberate with that data.

BTW, where do you think that all the CO2 emitted from all our fossil fuel burning is going if it's not going in the air? Sure, some of it is going into the ocean - and as a result, the ocean is more acidic than ever. If you have a better theory - I'd love to hear it.

I'm sorry, but see my other comments about other data sets which McKitrick and McIntyre have ignored.

LOL - come on now - I suppose you believe that sunspot activity is the primary cause of all climate change on Earth?

I suppose you have a better name? Should I have used "AGW dis-believer"?

There will always be some scientists that disagree - there should be. If there wasn't, scientists would not be doing their job. But among climate scientists, there is indeed, a consensus. Conspiracy theorists will always claim otherwise, however.

 

ufourya is out there in right wing nut la-la land. Everything you quoted from him above is a LIE and he either knows it or is in such deep DENIAL as to be certifiably insane. Any halfway intelligent person can see this.

At any rate, you can't have a productive conversation with liars or the insane. Doesn't matter what the data say, their approach will be to spin it to fit their claims. And they will shift their claims like nomads everytime the sparse support for them is removed. It's pretty standard Rovian fare. The wingnuts misrepresent the positions of those who have some expertise or a better handle on what is happening and use actual data and science to study it, then spin a tortured narrative of how right wingers with their blind ideological approach have it all figured out.

 

Here is one paper which demonstrates quite clearly that lack of evidence for CO2 being a major player in global climate and refutes the attendant claims made for global catastrophe.
http://ilovemycarbondioxide.com/pdf/GWReview_OISM150.pdf

I predict you will not bother to read it, understand it, or be able to rationally discuss it - especially the resident vitriolic liar/troll, Shawn Clark.

And here is your 'consensus':

31,478 Scientists Reject 'Global Warming' Agenda (Petition Project)
- Art Robinson Responds to Petition Slander (OISM)
- Art Robinson: A Scientist Finds Independence (American Spectator)
- Qualifications of Signers (OISM)
4000 Scientists sign 'The Heidelberg Appeal' (Science & Environmental Policy Project)
1100 Climate Realists sign 'The Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change' (ICSC)
700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims (US Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works)
- Morano responds to attacks on 650 Scientist Report (PDF)
500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares (The Heartland Institute)
400 Scientists Dispute Man-Made Global Warming Claims (US Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works)
116 Scientists Rebuke Obama as 'Simply Incorrect' on Global Warming (Cato Institute)
105 Scientists sign 'The Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change' (Science & Environmental Policy Project)
100 Scientists sign an 'Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations' (National Post, Canada)
60 Scientists call on Harper to revisit the science of global warming (Financial Post, Canada)
47 Scientists sign the 'Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming' (Science & Environmental Policy Project)
41 Scientists debunk global warming alert (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
35 Skeptical Scientists, 'The Deniers' (National Post, Canada)

Here are a few tight-wing nut, out in la la land, not even half-way intelligent denialists:

Bruce N. Ames, Director, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Center, Berkeley-Biochemistry-U.S.A.
* Phillip W. Anderson, Nobel Prize (Physics), Princeton University-Physics-U.S.A.
* Christian B. Anfinsen, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), John Hopkins University-Baltimore-Biology-U.S.A.
Henri Atlan, Professor, Head of Nuclear Medicine Department, Hotel Dieu, Paris-Nuclear Medicine-France
* Julius Axelrod, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Lab. Of Cell Biology Nat. Institute of Mental Health-Cell Biology-U.S.A.
Aden Bauleiu-Inserm, Ac. of Sciences, France, National Institute of Sciences, U.S.A. Lasker Prize-Endocrinology-France
* Baruj Benacerraf, Nobel Prize (Medicine), National Medal of Science, President, Dana-Farber, Inc.-Cancerology-U.S.A.
* Hans Albrecht Bethe, Nobel Prize (Physics), Emeritus Professor, Cornell University-Ithaca-NY-Nuclear Physics-U.S.A.
*Sir James W. Black, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor Of Analytical Pharmacology King's College, London- Pharmacology-Grande-Bretagne
* Nicholas Bloembergen, Nobel Prize (Physics), Harvard University-Physics-U.S.A.
Sir Hermann Bondi, Emeritus Professor Of Mathematics King's College University Master of Churchill College Cambridge-Mathematics-Grande-Bretagne
* Norman E, Borlaug, Nobel Prize (Peace), Sc. Consult CAMWOOD, Mexico Pdt. Sasakawa African Assoc.-Agriculture-U.S.A.
Pierre Bourdieu, College de France-Sociology-France
* Adolph Butenandt, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Hon. Pres. Max-Planck Institute-Chemistry-Allemagne
* Thomas R. Cech, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), University of Colorado-Chemistry-U.S.A.
Carlos Chagas, Academia Pontificia, WIS-Medicine-Bresil
* Owen Chamberlain, Professor, Nobel Prize (Physics), Emeritus Professor, University Of California-Berkeley-U.S.A.
* Stanley Cohen, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Distinguished Professor, Department of Biochem., Vanderbilt University-Biochemistry-U.S.A.
*Sir John Warcup Cornforth, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), School of Chemistry and Molecular Sciences, Brighton-Chemistry-Grande-Bretagne
* Jean Dausset, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Ac. of Sciences, France, Pres. U.M.S.E., W.I.S., Paris-Immunology-France
* Gerald Debreu, Nobel Prize (Economy), Emeritus Professor of Economics and Mathematics, University Of California-Economy-U.S.A.
* Johan Deisenhofer, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas-Biochemistry-U.S.A.
Sir Richard Doll, Emeritus Professor Of Medicine, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford-Epidemiology-Grande-Bretagne
* Christian de Duve, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Biology-Belgique
* Manfred Eigen, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), President of Max Plank Institute, Gottingen-Chemistry-Allemagne
* Richard R. Ernst, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich-Chemistry-Suisse
* Pierre-Gilles de Gennes, Nobel Prize (Physics), Ac. of Sciences, Professor, College de France, Paris-Physics-France
* Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize (Physics), Institute Professor, R.P.I.-Physics-U.S.A.
* Donald A. Glaser, Nobel Prize (Physics), Professor of Physics, University of California-Physics-U.S.A.
Francois Gros, Professor, College de France, Ac of Sciences, France, Vice President of WIS, Paris - Biology of development-France
* Roger Guillemin, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Whittier Institute, La Jolla-Medicine-U.S.A.
* Herbert A. Hauptman, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Pres. Med. Found. of Buffalo, Professor of Biophysics Sc-Biophysics-U.S.A.
Harald zur Hausen, Professor, Dr., Director of German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg-Cancerology-Allemagne
Mrs. Francoise Heritier-Auge, Professor, College de France, Pres Cons Nat. Sida Dir, Ehess-Anthropology-France
* Dudley R. Herschbach, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Baird Professor Of Science, Harvard University, Cambridge-Chemistry-U.S.A.
* Gerhard Herzberg, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), National Research Council of Canada, Chemistry - Canada
Benno Hess, Professor, Doctor, Honorary Senator and Former Vice President, Max-Planck Society , WIS - Biophysics-Allemagne
* Anthony Jewish, Nobel Prize (Physics), Professor, Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge University Physics - Grande-Bretagne
* Roald Hoffman, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Professor Of Chemistry, Cornell University-Chemistry-U.S.A.
* Robert Huber, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Max-Planck Institute for Biochemie, Biochemistry-Allemagne
*Sir Andrew Fielding Huxley, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Formerly President of London, Medicine-Grande-Bretagne
Serguei Petrovich Kapitza, Professor of Sciences, Institute for Physical Problems, WIS-Physics, electrodynamics-Russie
* Jerome Karle, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Chief Scientist, Lab for Structure of Matter, Chemistry-U.S.A.
*Sir John Kendrew, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Professor, The Old Guildhall, Cambridge, Molecular Biology-Grande-Bretagne
* Klaus Von Klitzing, Nobel Prize (Physics), Professor, Max-Planck Inst. Solid State Research, Stuttgart-Physics-Allemagne
* Aaron Klug, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), M.R.C. Lab. of Molecular Biology, Cambridge-Chemistry-Grande-Bretagne
* Edwin G. Krebs, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor Emeritus, Department of Pharm & Biochem, University of Washington-Biochemistry-U.S.A.
* Leon Lederman, Nobel Prize (Physics), Director Emeritus, Fermi Nat'l Accelerator Laboratory, Nuclear Physics-U.S.A.
* Yuan T. Lee, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Professor of Chemistry, University of California-Berkeley-U.S.A.
* Jean-Marie Lehn, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Professor, College de France, W.I.S. Chemistry-France
Pierre Lelong, Professor, Ac of Sciences, W.I.S.-Mathematics-France
* Wassily Leontief, Nobel Prize (Economy), Professor, New York University-Economy-U.S.A.
* Rita Levi-Montalcini, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Ac Lincei, Ac Pontificia, W.I.S.-Neurosciences-Italie
Andr Linchnerowicz, Professor, Ac of Sciences France, Ac Lincei, Ac Pontificia, President of W.I.S., Mathematical Physics-France
Richard S. Lindzen, Professor, US National Academy of Sciences, M.I.T., W.I.S.-Meteorology-U.S.A.
* William N. Lipscomb, Nobel Prize Winner (Chemistry), Professor Emeritus, Harvard University, Cambridge-Chemistry-U.S.A.
* Harry M. Markowitz, Nobel Prize (Economics), Speizer Professor of Finance, Baruch College-U.S.A.
* Simon van der Meer, Nobel Prize (Physics), Geneva-Nuclear Physics-Suisse
* Cesar Milstein, Nobel Prize (Physiology), Dr Cambridge-Physiology-Grande-Bretagne
*Sir. Nevil F. Mott, Nobel Prize Winner (Physics), Emeritus Professor, Cambridge University, Physics-Grande-Bretagne
* Joseph Murray, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor, Dr Surgery, Harvard Med School-Cell Biology-U.S.A.
* Daniel Nathans, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor, John Hopkins Un, School of Medicine, Baltimore-Molecular Genetics-U.S.A.
Daniel W. Nebert, Professor, Director, Center for Environmental Genetics, University of Cincinnati, Genetics-U.S.A.
* Louis Neel, Nobel Prize (Physics), Physics-France
* Erwin Neher, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Doctor, Director, Max-Planck Institute, Biophysics, Goettingen-Biophysics-Allemagne
* Marshall W. Nirenberg, Nobel Prize (Medicine), National Institutes of Health, Bethesda-Medicine-U.S.A.
* George E. Palade, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor, Division of Cellular & Molecular Med, Cell Medicine-U.S.A.
* Linus Pauling, Nobel Prize (Chemistry, Peace), Professor, Linus Pauling Institute Sc and Med, Chemistry-U.S.A.
Jean-Claude Pecker, Professor Hon, College de France, Ac of Sciences, Royal Ac of Belgium, W.I.S.-Astrophysics-France
* Amo A. Penzias, Nobel Prize (Physics), Professor, Bell Labortories, Murray Hill-Physics-U.S.A.
* Max Ferdinand Perutz, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge-Biochemistry-Grande-Bretagne
Julian Peto, Professor, Head , Section of Epidemiology, Institute of Cancer Research, London-Epidemiology-Grande-Bretagne
Richard Peto, Professor of Medical Statistics & Epidemiology, University of Oxford-Epidemiology-Grande-Bretagne
* John Charles Polanyi, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Professor Of Chemistry, University of Toronto-Chemistry-Canada
*Lord George Porter, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Professor, Chairman, Photomolec, Sc Imperial College, London-Chemistry-Grande-Bretagne
* I. Prigogine, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Professor, Director, Institute Intern. de Phys. et de Chim, Bruxelles-Chemistry-Belgique
A. Prochiantz, Pr, Director of Research CNRS, Ecole Normale Suprieure, Paris, W.I.S.-Pharmacology-France
Ichtiaque Rasool, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena-Physics-France
* Tadeus Reichstein, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor Emeritus, Org Chemistry, University of Basel-Organic Chemistry-Suisse
* Heinrich Rohrer, Nobel Prize (Physics), IBM Research Laboratory, Physics-Suisse
* Bert Sakmann, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor, Max-Planck Inst for Med. Forschung, Heidelberg-Cell Biology-Allemange
* Abdus Salam, Nobel Prize (Physics), International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Italie
Jonas Salk, Distinguished Pr., Dr , International Health Sciences-Biology-USA
Evry Schatzman, Professor, Ac of Sciences-France-Astrophysics-France
* Arthur L. Schawlow, Nobel Prize (Physics), Stanford University-Physics-U.S.A.
G. Schettler, Professor, Director, Former President, Academy of Sciences, Heidelberg-Cardiology-Allemagne
Elie A. Shneour, Professor, Director, Biosystems Research Institute, San Diego, California-U.S.A.
* Kai Siegbahn, Nobel Prize (Physics), Physics-Suede
S. Fred Singer, Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, Director of the Washington S.E.P.P, EnvironmentalSciences-U.S.A.
* Richard Laurence Millington Synge, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Biochemistry-Grande-Bretagne
GP Talwar, Professor Emeritus, Nat Inst of Immunology, Ac of Sciences, India, W.I.S.-Immunology-Inde
* Jan Tinbergen, Nobel Prize (Economy), Economy-Pays-Bas
*Lord Alexander Todd, Nobel Prize (Chemistry), Chemistry-Grande-Bretagne
Alvin Toffler, Author-Futurist-Futurology-U.S.A.
* Charles H. Townes, Nobel Prize (Physics), W.I.S. Professor Emeritus, Physics, University of California, Berkeley-Physics-U.S.A.
Ren Truhaut, Professor, Pharmacology Facult des Sciences, Pharmaceutiques, Paris-Toxicology-France
*Sir John R. Vane , Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor, Chairman of William Harvey Research Institute, London-Endocrinology-Grande-Bretagne
* Harold E. Varmus, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor of Microbiology, University of California, San Francisco-Microbiology-U.S.A.
* Thomas Huckle Weller, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor Emeritus, Harvard-Medicine-U.S.A.
* Elie Wiesel, Nobel Prize (Peace), University of Boston Literature-U.S.A.
* Torsten N. Wiesel, Nobel Prize (Medicine), Professor, Lab of Neurobiology, Rockefeller University of New York, Neurobiology-U.S.A.
* Robert W. Wilson, Nobel Prize (Physics), Head, Radio Physics Res Department, AT&T Bell Laboratories-Physics-U.S.A.

 

Gee - back with the name calling again, eh? I did read it, and while the pretty charts may appear convincing on the surface, the so called scientists and OISM organization are rather dubious in credentials (who is funding them?).

The Petition Project is also of dubious credentials and affiliate with OISM. Never mind that the nearly all of those "scientists" don't know any more about climate than the typical layman.

Just more bending of the facts. Got any more?

 

Has ufourya ever posted anything useful to the forum? Anything of redeeming value that actually helped other users or his fellow man in anyway? Or are his posts all just 100% BS/pseudoscience pushing?

Afterall, he proved himself a liar several times over, not just in his presentation of material, but on a personal level when he told us he was going to leave...but the troll came back to alot of guffaws. So we know his word is worthless.

What possesses denialists to act this way? I don't go wading into the denialist formus to joust with those ideologues. Not that I fear doing so as they are so scientifically inept that it's no more challenging than big game hunting at a zoo, just that I consider it a pointless exercise. So why do they find it necessary to come here where they are so badly outmatched? What do they think they gain other than convincing us to dismiss them as self-deluded?

The denialist contingent won't even accept the most basic indisputable, proven parts: CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas, and humans are increasing its concentration in the atmosphere and oceans very rapidly by burning millions of years worth of fossil fuels. Instead they have idiotic, easily disproven absolutes like "humans (or life in general--my favorite) can't have an impact on climate", etc.

Discussions about degree of influence of CO2, solar output, cosmic rays, volcanic activity, orbital variation, etc. are quite worthy of debate. But starting from the standpoint that any one of them has no measurable impact is folly. Yet that is where the denialist movement begins. Ufourya and his denialists all seem to fall into the same circular logic trap.

Unlike ufourya, I hope that I'm wrong and that global warming is not really a concern. I hope that other underlying trends will offset the impact of our CO2 addition. Of course, even if they do, the oceans are becoming acidic enough that there may be other large consequences for us unrelated to temperature.

 

Yes, I also hope that thousands of experts in climate change are completely wrong and that we humans have no impact on rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. But I'm not going to argue that it isn't happening just because I want it to be that way.

My feeble brain says, if we are pumping carbon based material out of the ground, burning it to provide energy to power virtually everything, then where does it go when we are done with it? It seems to me that we are transferring it into the atmosphere. Yes, the oceans and plants can buffer some of the excess, but it has to have an effect eventually. Give me a reasonable explanation that doesn't involve it building up in the atmosphere.

 

There isn't one. And there aren't any good theories (besides human caused) to explain why CO2 has risen so dramatically in the past 200 years, either.

In fact, carbon isotope readings have proven that CO2 emissions as measured from the air are a direct result of humans burning fossil fuels.

Well duh! Shouldn't take a climate scientist to figure that one out.

 

The only positive thing to remember about methane is that its life time in the atmosphere is limited (12 ± 3 years). Still, that duration would probably be sufficient to cause a snowball effect in melting Greenland and Antartica, etc.

 

Perhaps you might notice that Shawn Clark seems unable to refer to skeptics (particularly me, since I post my skepticism here) in other than 'name calling' ways. My reply is in response to him, not you. Why not chide him as well? I have stated that I will respond in kind. If you don't call me names, I will treat you in the same fashion.

You refrain from discussing the science and prefer to attack the scientists for spurious reasons.

You might be unaware of a few things here. The IPCC does not restrict itself to making comments about climate, but includes extreme scenarios that revolve around disease, poverty and the like in their dlimate reports. That is why you will find so many MDs on these lists. Also note that the MDs have other degrees in scientific areas. You may attempt to discredit them by trying to tie them to a specific organization or question their 'funding'. In the process you are ignoring that the scientists porpounding the AGW theory receive funding from governmental agencies (and 'panels') with huge reserves taken from taxpayers. If the AGW theory evaporates (as it surely will) these 'impartial climate scientists' will be scrambling for jobs outside the climate alarm industry.

The scientists in the referred paper have never been accused of manufacturing data and evidence unliike Michael Mann, Keith Briffa and others on the Hockey Team who work for the IPCC and other government agencies whose data have come into question.

AGW proponents are funded with a thousand times more money than their skeptical counterparts.

 

You enjoy calling me a liar. I have preferred to return your petty insults rather than engage you in rational discussion since you seem incapable.

I am calling you out. I have never said that I was leaving. I said I would be alright with allowing another thread on this site to expire. Others wished to continue posting in the thread, so I followed suit. Prove any instance of my 'lying' and I'll apologize and never sully this site again with my truth-telling. By the way, 'lying' does not mean anything with which you disagree. I challenge you to point out a specific instance. Otherwise, you go on my ignore list and will be its only resident.

It is you who has rarely posted a useful comment, preferring to call me names and impugn my intelligence. I'll be waiting for your proof.

P.S. If I can prove that you have lied, will you follow suit and cease posting on PC?

 

Yet another reason to distrust the IPCC (and for that matter, Wikipedia, or even GISS when it comes to climate science.)

United Nations Pulls Hockey Stick from Climate Report