And you thought global warming theory was B.S? This is even moreridiculous. Controlling gravity

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35861334

If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

On Wednesday, 23 March 2016 10:33:02 UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Theory. Based on science so sloppy and manipulated it would NEVER be taken seriously in any other field.

On Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:34:52 UTC+1, RichA wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 March 2016 10:33:02 UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Theory. Based on science so sloppy and manipulated it would NEVER be taken seriously in any other field.

Tomorrow's science is today's magic.

Rockets can't do even local interstellar without a Sun-sized fuel tank.

Where there's a need, science will [eventually] find a way.

e.g. When there was a global need for spinal curvature they invented the mobile phone.

On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 10:33:02 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Nonsense.

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.

On Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:48:18 UTC+1, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 10:33:02 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Nonsense.

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.

Nobody could possibly call you biased. Could they? Ho-ho-ho. ;o))

On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 12:55:51 PM UTC-4, Chris.B wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:48:18 UTC+1, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 10:33:02 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Nonsense.

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.

Nobody could possibly call you biased. Could they? Ho-ho-ho. ;o))

I think that warmingistas shouldn't drive/ride in cars, or fly in airplanes, etc., or own/use swimming pools. They should hand wash and line dry their clothes, do without air conditioning and look to traditional Chukchi-style methods for ideas about staying warm in the winter. Their houses should be much smaller, better yet they should live closely jammed together. They should have no more than two kids, one would be better. Their food should be locally sourced, including the candy. No need for them to have alcohol either. They should own/use much less of everything than most of them actually do.

There is nothing biased about any of that.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:34:49 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

On Wednesday, 23 March 2016 10:33:02 UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Theory. Based on science so sloppy and manipulated it would NEVER be taken seriously in any other field.

Global warming is an observation. It is undeniable. That the current
warming is caused by humans is a theory, but one which is accepted by
virtually every climate scientist.

Denial of AGW is precisely the same as believing the Earth is flat.
And people who think that way lack any credibility at all when it
comes to any intellectual ability.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:48:15 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 10:33:02 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Nonsense.

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.

On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 1:31:02 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:48:15 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 10:33:02 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
If you think global warming (which is an observation, not a theory) is
BS, you're not qualified to hold any opinion on scientific matters.

Nonsense.

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.