On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 2:08:37 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 10:59:05 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:


One can legitimately dismiss this issue by noting the near-universal hypocrisy of the warmingistas, whether they be scientists, pseudo-scientists, faux-eco celebs, liberal dimwits, conniving, power hungry politicians, or any combination thereof.

Thank you for demonstrating my point. We already know that you have no
intellectual skills or significant connection with reality. And here
we see it applied to global warming.

Incorrect. Go back to the original tragedy of the commons scenario. If someone (let's call him Albert) who grazes ten cows on the commons tells those who graze only two cows on the commons that -they- (excluding Albert, of course) all need to cut back to one cow in order to save the commons, we can conclude that Albert is full of **** and act accordingly. The same principle applies to AGW.

Intelligent people understand that AGW is a matter of science. You are
unable to separate that science from your personal opinions about
social policy. But science requires thinking, and you have no facility
for that, being nothing more than a dogma spewing automaton.

No, we skeptics decide that the science is a relatively minor concern since even the scientists themselves do practically NOTHING to reduce their own emissions in any helpful way.