Creative83 wrote: » Your hero, Al Gore... what did he say would happen in ten years from 2003?
ancapailldorcha wrote: » The tone of your posts suggests otherwise and I really, really should know better than to ask but have you any facts at all to support your argument? Randomers in Youtube videos do not count. I mean actual Geographical, Geological or Meteorological evidence that's been published in peer-reviewed journals.
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » Weather and climate are 2 different things.
Creative83 wrote: » It is sad to see that you have been taken in, hook line and sinker
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » The 97 per cent figure has been debunked many times. It was a survey of a tiny few scientists and many didb't even reply.
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » Climate change has become one of the causes that the liberal left have attached themselves to. Like most issues these people become attached to it has become a sort of cult. Anyone who even questions the consensus is labelled a 'denier' There are climate scientists in top US colleges who complain that funding is only given to scientists who accept human caused climate change and some are even afraid to voice their opinion for fear of the backlash.
Creative83 wrote: » Yep, because they are employed to prove it.... any contrary opinion is hounded out
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » Do you?
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » No, I like questioning things rather than attaching myself to causes that are currently fashionable. Read the link I sent. he explains why it's horse****
Twenty Grand;107644217]If it's not 97% then what is it then? Reliable source please.
Proof please?
Thoughtform wrote: » "The left believe it" is not valid reason to deny it. Forget about obsessing over where on the political divide people occupy and do some research. "It's all bollocks because I don't want to believe it" isn't a counter-argument either.
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » I've no idea what it is, but, like the gender pay gap, the 97 figure is 100 per cent bull.https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/02/global-warming-follow-money-henry-payne/
WinnyThePoo wrote: » So the 97 percent figure is bull because something completely irrelevant you think is bull also. So we've got You like to do your own research Climate change is fashionable Something about gender pay gap
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/#5eabc3f33f9f He completely debunks the propoganda
jaxxx wrote: » Can I place a wager that the OP is a flat Earther?
Sweetemotion wrote: » Listen from 2:30 minute mark.
GreeBo wrote: » Wow, that was pretty pathetic from "I'm a scientist" McElhinney. Bangs on about the 98% figure being nonsense as there is no list but then 2 minutes later uses "Everyone knows that Europe is failing" as the basis of her argument. :rolleyes:
Sweetemotion wrote: » Didn't 97% of scientists at one time also claim the the earth was flat?
Sweetemotion wrote: » Is she wrong about the 98%?
DickSwiveller Returns wrote: » That's the thing. The climate change alarmists are just like the clerics who hounded Gallileo. They don't want their interpretation challenged. A lot of this has to do with the power of conventional wisdom/fashion and very little to do with actually thinking for themselves.
GreeBo wrote: » About the veracity of the figure or how it was arrived it?
Twenty Grand wrote: » Total bullsh*t and equating the 17th century church to modern scientists is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
Sweetemotion wrote: » That's what the 17th century scientists were saying about the 11th century scientists.
