Global Warming is NOT accelerating !!!

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

wrote in message ...

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

*** No, I'm not denying that ... what you forgot to mention, though, is the
fact that ALL of those experts relay on a paycheck that is funded by
agencies who want Global Warming to be a fact.
You guys are just like the deadbeat Democrats, who vote along the party line
to perpetuate the flow of Federal Funds to finance their Welfare, EBT cards,
Section 8 housing, free cell phones etc. If they vote for anything else,
they'd lose those "benefits".
The entire IPCC has been exposed as a ham, altered emails to match the
expected outcome, the former head run out of office for sexual advances of
female staff members, not a single one with a degree in Climatology, yet
dummies like you hang onto their asinine climate concoctions like the
lemmings did to Hillary's shrieking voice.
Get a life.

On Saturday, April 6, 2019 at 2:08:40 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
Yet another report by a scientist who has actually studied climatology,
unlike 99% of the members of the IPCC, whose leader, Rajendra Pachauri, had
to resign over sexual impropriety charges, that sham organization whose
paycheck solely depends on the propagation of the Climate Change hoax:

https://www.thegwpf.org/new-report-g...-accelerating/

I'm sure Palsing will have another cow over this one ... but not to worry,
Palsing, your hero Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will do away with the critters,
since they fart too much.

Well, your guy here is actually a geologist...

On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 12:14:49 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
wrote in message ...

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

*** No, I'm not denying that ... what you forgot to mention, though, is the
fact that ALL of those experts relay on a paycheck that is funded by
agencies who want Global Warming to be a fact.
You guys are just like the deadbeat Democrats, who vote along the party line
to perpetuate the flow of Federal Funds to finance their Welfare, EBT cards,
Section 8 housing, free cell phones etc. If they vote for anything else,
they'd lose those "benefits".
The entire IPCC has been exposed as a ham, altered emails to match the
expected outcome, the former head run out of office for sexual advances of
female staff members, not a single one with a degree in Climatology, yet
dummies like you hang onto their asinine climate concoctions like the
lemmings did to Hillary's shrieking voice.
Get a life.

You really need to get your facts straight...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming

"This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict with the scientific consensus on global warming as summarized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other scientific bodies. A minority are climatologists. Nearly all publishing climate scientists (97–98%[1]) support the consensus on anthropogenic climate change.[3][4]"

Be sure and read those last 2 sentences really slowly so you can fully understand what they are saying in really clear English.

On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 2:20:13 PM UTC-7, palsing wrote:
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 12:14:49 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
wrote in message ...

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

*** No, I'm not denying that ... what you forgot to mention, though, is the
fact that ALL of those experts relay on a paycheck that is funded by
agencies who want Global Warming to be a fact.
You guys are just like the deadbeat Democrats, who vote along the party line
to perpetuate the flow of Federal Funds to finance their Welfare, EBT cards,
Section 8 housing, free cell phones etc. If they vote for anything else,
they'd lose those "benefits".
The entire IPCC has been exposed as a ham, altered emails to match the
expected outcome, the former head run out of office for sexual advances of
female staff members, not a single one with a degree in Climatology, yet
dummies like you hang onto their asinine climate concoctions like the
lemmings did to Hillary's shrieking voice.
Get a life.

You really need to get your facts straight...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming

"This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict with the scientific consensus on global warming as summarized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other scientific bodies. A minority are climatologists. Nearly all publishing climate scientists (97–98%[1]) support the consensus on anthropogenic climate change.[3][4]"

Be sure and read those last 2 sentences really slowly so you can fully understand what they are saying in really clear English.

And by the way, according to this link...

"For the purpose of this list, a "scientist" is defined as an individual who has published at least one peer-reviewed research article in the broad field of natural sciences, although not necessarily in a field relevant to climatology."

Here is a list of peer-reviewed papers by your latest hero, Ole Humlum...

https://www.skepticalscience.com/pee...tics.php?s=153

Really, you need to check your facts because from where I'm sitting you don't have a clue...

palsing wrote:
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 12:14:49 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
wrote in message ...

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

*** No, I'm not denying that ... what you forgot to mention, though,
is the fact that ALL of those experts relay on a paycheck that is
funded by agencies who want Global Warming to be a fact.
You guys are just like the deadbeat Democrats, who vote along the
party line to perpetuate the flow of Federal Funds to finance their
Welfare, EBT cards, Section 8 housing, free cell phones etc. If they
vote for anything else, they'd lose those "benefits".
The entire IPCC has been exposed as a ham, altered emails to match the
expected outcome, the former head run out of office for sexual
advances of female staff members, not a single one with a degree in
Climatology, yet dummies like you hang onto their asinine climate
concoctions like the lemmings did to Hillary's shrieking voice.
Get a life.

You really need to get your facts straight...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming

"This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict
with the scientific consensus on global warming as summarized by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other
scientific bodies. A minority are climatologists. Nearly all publishing
climate scientists (97-98%[1]) support the consensus on anthropogenic
climate change.[3][4]"

Be sure and read those last 2 sentences really slowly so you can fully
understand what they are saying in really clear English.




Huh? WIKIPEDIA, is all you got ?
giggle

The National Enquirer is far more credible than that,.....and they probably
blame Aliens or Elvis. for any climate issues

On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 9:56:43 AM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
palsing wrote:
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 12:14:49 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
wrote in message ...

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

*** No, I'm not denying that ... what you forgot to mention, though,
is the fact that ALL of those experts relay on a paycheck that is
funded by agencies who want Global Warming to be a fact.
You guys are just like the deadbeat Democrats, who vote along the
party line to perpetuate the flow of Federal Funds to finance their
Welfare, EBT cards, Section 8 housing, free cell phones etc. If they
vote for anything else, they'd lose those "benefits".
The entire IPCC has been exposed as a ham, altered emails to match the
expected outcome, the former head run out of office for sexual
advances of female staff members, not a single one with a degree in
Climatology, yet dummies like you hang onto their asinine climate
concoctions like the lemmings did to Hillary's shrieking voice.
Get a life.

You really need to get your facts straight...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming

"This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict
with the scientific consensus on global warming as summarized by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other
scientific bodies. A minority are climatologists. Nearly all publishing
climate scientists (97-98%[1]) support the consensus on anthropogenic
climate change.[3][4]"

Be sure and read those last 2 sentences really slowly so you can fully
understand what they are saying in really clear English.




Huh? WIKIPEDIA, is all you got ?

giggle

You can giggle all you want, but that Wiki article was fully referenced

The National Enquirer is far more credible than that...

That's an outright exaggeration and only shows, as expected, that you have no actual rebuttal ...

"palsing" wrote in message
...

On Saturday, April 6, 2019 at 2:08:40 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
Yet another report by a scientist who has actually studied climatology,
unlike 99% of the members of the IPCC, whose leader, Rajendra Pachauri,
had
to resign over sexual impropriety charges, that sham organization whose
paycheck solely depends on the propagation of the Climate Change hoax:

https://www.thegwpf.org/new-report-g...-accelerating/

I'm sure Palsing will have another cow over this one ... but not to worry,
Palsing, your hero Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will do away with the
critters,
since they fart too much.

Well, your guy here is actually a geologist...


*** Unlike all of your WikiPedia Pseudo Science hacks that you keep dragging
up from obscurity. Global Warming ??? Just follow the money, honey ...

"palsing" wrote in message
...

On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 9:56:43 AM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
palsing wrote:
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 12:14:49 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
wrote in message ...

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

*** No, I'm not denying that ... what you forgot to mention, though,
is the fact that ALL of those experts relay on a paycheck that is
funded by agencies who want Global Warming to be a fact.
You guys are just like the deadbeat Democrats, who vote along the
party line to perpetuate the flow of Federal Funds to finance their
Welfare, EBT cards, Section 8 housing, free cell phones etc. If they
vote for anything else, they'd lose those "benefits".
The entire IPCC has been exposed as a ham, altered emails to match the
expected outcome, the former head run out of office for sexual
advances of female staff members, not a single one with a degree in
Climatology, yet dummies like you hang onto their asinine climate
concoctions like the lemmings did to Hillary's shrieking voice.
Get a life.

You really need to get your facts straight...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming

"This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict
with the scientific consensus on global warming as summarized by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other
scientific bodies. A minority are climatologists. Nearly all publishing
climate scientists (97-98%[1]) support the consensus on anthropogenic
climate change.[3][4]"

Be sure and read those last 2 sentences really slowly so you can fully
understand what they are saying in really clear English.




Huh? WIKIPEDIA, is all you got ?

giggle

You can giggle all you want, but that Wiki article was fully referenced

The National Enquirer is far more credible than that...

That's an outright exaggeration and only shows, as expected, that you have
no actual rebuttal ...

*** Your stupid **** is really difficult to "rebut" to ...

On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:13:30 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
"palsing" wrote in message
...

On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 9:56:43 AM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
palsing wrote:
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 12:14:49 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
wrote in message ...

The absolute overwhelming preponderance of opinions among experts, is
in support of global warming. Surely you're not trying to deny that ?

( One climentologist not withstanding. )

*** No, I'm not denying that ... what you forgot to mention, though,
is the fact that ALL of those experts relay on a paycheck that is
funded by agencies who want Global Warming to be a fact.
You guys are just like the deadbeat Democrats, who vote along the
party line to perpetuate the flow of Federal Funds to finance their
Welfare, EBT cards, Section 8 housing, free cell phones etc. If they
vote for anything else, they'd lose those "benefits".
The entire IPCC has been exposed as a ham, altered emails to match the
expected outcome, the former head run out of office for sexual
advances of female staff members, not a single one with a degree in
Climatology, yet dummies like you hang onto their asinine climate
concoctions like the lemmings did to Hillary's shrieking voice.
Get a life.

You really need to get your facts straight...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming

"This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict
with the scientific consensus on global warming as summarized by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other
scientific bodies. A minority are climatologists. Nearly all publishing
climate scientists (97-98%[1]) support the consensus on anthropogenic
climate change.[3][4]"

Be sure and read those last 2 sentences really slowly so you can fully
understand what they are saying in really clear English.




Huh? WIKIPEDIA, is all you got ?

giggle

You can giggle all you want, but that Wiki article was fully referenced

The National Enquirer is far more credible than that...

That's an outright exaggeration and only shows, as expected, that you have
no actual rebuttal ...

*** Your stupid **** is really difficult to "rebut" to ...

Yeah, you have no rebuttal, either...