Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49799 May 15, 2014
Another Damn Liberal wrote:
Here's Roy Spencer debunked. Happy now George?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climat...
The top ten global warming 'skeptic' arguments answered
Contrarian climate scientist Roy Spencer put forth the top 10 'skeptic' arguments - all are easily answered
And I just realized this is the Guardian. Isnt that a source that has been ridiculed by Baco in the past? Can they be a credible source when it suits you but not a credible one when they dont? Yeah that seems to be the way you work. Spencer was credible and now you are trying to discredit him. I guess if we wait til tomorrow you will be trying to discredit the Guardian as a source if I post something they said that you dont like. LOL

“Save light, save coal.”

Since: Sep 09

Clarksburg, WV

#49800 May 15, 2014
Here is what the IPCC is, George. They think a lot harder than you do about Climate Change.
http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization....

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. In the same year, the UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.

The IPCC is a scientific body under the auspices of the United Nations (UN). It reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters.

Thousands of scientists from all over the world contribute to the work of the IPCC on a voluntary basis. Review is an essential part of the IPCC process, to ensure an objective and complete assessment of current information. IPCC aims to reflect a range of views and expertise. The Secretariat coordinates all the IPCC work and liaises with Governments. It is supported by WMO and UNEP and hosted at WMO headquarters in Geneva.

The IPCC is an intergovernmental body. It is open to all member countries of the United Nations (UN) and WMO. Currently 195 countries are members of the IPCC. Governments participate in the review process and the plenary Sessions, where main decisions about the IPCC work programme are taken and reports are accepted, adopted and approved. The IPCC Bureau Members, including the Chair, are also elected during the plenary Sessions.

Because of its scientific and intergovernmental nature, the IPCC embodies a unique opportunity to provide rigorous and balanced scientific information to decision makers. By endorsing the IPCC reports, governments acknowledge the authority of their scientific content. The work of the organization is therefore policy-relevant and yet policy-neutral, never policy-prescriptive.
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49801 May 15, 2014
From the Guardian: Naw they dont want my money.

"Climate finance involves flows of funds from developed to developing nations to help poorer countries to cut their emissions and adapt to climate change. The sources and governance of climate finance has been widely debated since the 2009 climate change summit in Copenhagen, where industrialised countries committed to giving $100 billion a year in additional climate finance from 2020 onwards. To get things going, immediate 'fast-start' finance of up to $30 billion was promised until the end of 2012."

“Our founders”

Since: May 13

NEVER COMPLIED

#49802 May 15, 2014
George wrote:
<quoted text>And I just realized this is the Guardian. Isnt that a source that has been ridiculed by Baco in the past? Can they be a credible source when it suits you but not a credible one when they dont? Yeah that seems to be the way you work. Spencer was credible and now you are trying to discredit him. I guess if we wait til tomorrow you will be trying to discredit the Guardian as a source if I post something they said that you dont like. LOL
No, you said the The Guardian wasn't a good source when I cited them about Bush's illegal war that killed a million innocent civilians, his admission of war crimes and subsequent pardoning by Obama. But then I told you they were the ones who Snowden went to, and you relinquished your stance.
Yeahright

Elizabeth, WV

#49803 May 15, 2014
Another Damn Liberal wrote:
Here is what the IPCC is, George. They think a lot harder than you do about Climate Change.
http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization....
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. In the same year, the UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.
The IPCC is a scientific body under the auspices of the United Nations (UN). It reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters.
Thousands of scientists from all over the world contribute to the work of the IPCC on a voluntary basis. Review is an essential part of the IPCC process, to ensure an objective and complete assessment of current information. IPCC aims to reflect a range of views and expertise. The Secretariat coordinates all the IPCC work and liaises with Governments. It is supported by WMO and UNEP and hosted at WMO headquarters in Geneva.
The IPCC is an intergovernmental body. It is open to all member countries of the United Nations (UN) and WMO. Currently 195 countries are members of the IPCC. Governments participate in the review process and the plenary Sessions, where main decisions about the IPCC work programme are taken and reports are accepted, adopted and approved. The IPCC Bureau Members, including the Chair, are also elected during the plenary Sessions.
Because of its scientific and intergovernmental nature, the IPCC embodies a unique opportunity to provide rigorous and balanced scientific information to decision makers. By endorsing the IPCC reports, governments acknowledge the authority of their scientific content. The work of the organization is therefore policy-relevant and yet policy-neutral, never policy-prescriptive.
I know what the IPCC. A sham organization created by the UN(the UN hahaha) to steal my money on unsubstantiated claims of gloom and doom. I dont need the IPCC's ridiculous self description to know what they are. The are NOT a scientific organization but rather a political one and their goal is one thing. MONEY
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49804 May 15, 2014
Me again, my bad. Not on purpose.
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49805 May 15, 2014
Obama and the EPA run wild. This has got to stop. COngress needs to decide these thing, not decrees by the King and his puppet governmental agency.

==========

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) Texas environmental advocates are applauding a new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposal to reduce oil refinery pollution by forcing operators to adopt new technology that better monitors and controls emissions.
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49806 May 15, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you said the The Guardian wasn't a good source when I cited them about Bush's illegal war that killed a million innocent civilians, his admission of war crimes and subsequent pardoning by Obama. But then I told you they were the ones who Snowden went to, and you relinquished your stance.
Strike three, you are out. Back to same old same.You are a pathological LIAR. I NEVER said the Guardian wasnt a good source, and I never relinquished anything because of some lie or idiocy you said. I knew the Guardian was behind the Snowden story since it was first reported ya lying dumbass and would NEVER question their credibility. You are a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR. Again back to falsely claiming what my opinions or claims are instead of defending your own. Pathetic. And I tried to not call you a liar like you asked, but you are in fact the very definition of a narcissistic pathological habitual LIAR.

“Our founders”

Since: May 13

NEVER COMPLIED

#49807 May 15, 2014
George wrote:
<quoted text>The hoax is claiming there is evidence that man is causing a HARMFUL rise in temperatures AND that by taxing me, shutting down coal, etc. will make ANY difference at all to the naturally and continually changing climate. I know I will have to repost that a few hundred more times so I will just copy and paste, and save it so I don thave to type it repeatedly when you attempt to twist my opinion to push your agenda and mislead people into what I think. Still constantly repeating what MY opinion is instead of defending your OWN opinion. Weak.
The difference between the last ice age and now is about 4 degrees. Can you tell me how much we can raise the temperature and it NOT be harmful? You keep implying there is some degree of warming that is beneficial. What is it?

And why do you keep up the senseless and macabre notion that we should do nothing with regards to our continued use of fossil fuels because the effects are too far off or already unavoidable? Who thinks that way? Do you seriously have no concern about what our planet is like 200, 500 or 1,000 years from now? Really? You don't think we have a responsibility to future generations to do what we can to mitigate the damage we cause?

What, George, should we do? Do you advocate assuming the science is wrong and continuing our fossil fuel use unfettered? Do you support heavy investment in green technologies in anticipation of an unavoidable depletion of fossil fuels?

“Our founders”

Since: May 13

NEVER COMPLIED

#49808 May 15, 2014
George wrote:
Obama and the EPA run wild. This has got to stop. COngress needs to decide these thing, not decrees by the King and his puppet governmental agency.
==========
FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) Texas environmental advocates are applauding a new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposal to reduce oil refinery pollution by forcing operators to adopt new technology that better monitors and controls emissions.
Congress. Hilarious. They can't decide if there should be a minimum wage increase, if background checks for gun purchases should be expanded or if women should make the same money as men for the same jobs. If we wait for Congress to decide whether or not pollution should be controlled at refineries, we'll run out of oil first.

Can you tell me anything Congress has decided in the past 6 years?
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49809 May 15, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you said the The Guardian wasn't a good source when I cited them about Bush's illegal war that killed a million innocent civilians, his admission of war crimes and subsequent pardoning by Obama. But then I told you they were the ones who Snowden went to, and you relinquished your stance.
Why dont you repost the above LIE so we can all see where I said what you are falsely claiming. Oh that is right, it was a lie, so you cant, and now have some fabulous excuse to why you wont post it. I wont bother wasting my time because I can go back and once AGAIN, PROVE you are LYING, just like I did with the 93 million, like I did with the tunnel diggers, like I did with volcanoes, like I did with Curry, etc. etc. etc.

“Save light, save coal.”

Since: Sep 09

Clarksburg, WV

#49810 May 15, 2014
Yeahright wrote:
<quoted text>I know what the IPCC. A sham organization created by the UN(the UN hahaha) to steal my money on unsubstantiated claims of gloom and doom. I dont need the IPCC's ridiculous self description to know what they are. The are NOT a scientific organization but rather a political one and their goal is one thing. MONEY
Lying George posts under another name again, and continues to not understand facts.

“Our founders”

Since: May 13

NEVER COMPLIED

#49811 May 15, 2014
George wrote:
<quoted text>Strike three, you are out. Back to same old same.You are a pathological LIAR. I NEVER said the Guardian wasnt a good source, and I never relinquished anything because of some lie or idiocy you said. I knew the Guardian was behind the Snowden story since it was first reported ya lying dumbass and would NEVER question their credibility. You are a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR. Again back to falsely claiming what my opinions or claims are instead of defending your own. Pathetic. And I tried to not call you a liar like you asked, but you are in fact the very definition of a narcissistic pathological habitual LIAR.
You're confused, The Guardian was one of my sources I used to illustrate the pardoning of Obama. You questioned it then. Something along the lines of you "don't care" what "some liberal rag" (I'm paraphrasing - not quoting directly) says about Bush. Then I pointed out that it was the Guardian and then you started quoting it to try to attack Obama. I don't think you were questioning the Guardian as much as you didn't realize that it was the Guardian.

“Our founders”

Since: May 13

NEVER COMPLIED

#49812 May 15, 2014
*Pardoning of Bush. Not Obama. Freudian slip.
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49813 May 15, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference between the last ice age and now is about 4 degrees. Can you tell me how much we can raise the temperature and it NOT be harmful? You keep implying there is some degree of warming that is beneficial. What is it?
Actually it was more like 5 Celsius, funny how you always leave off the C in an attempt to deceive. This is the USA, we use Fahrenheit. And I havent a clue how much and not be harmful and neither do you, and that is part of the point. No one knows, and considering there is not credible evidence to back claims of man causing a harmful rise in temps we shouldnt be basing harmful economic policies on it. Compared to an Ice Age that according to some we should be headed for soon, a 5C rise would be beneficial. LOL Better to err on the side of warmth. Life thrives on earth in warmth, doesnt do so well in bitter cold.
fitness-guru

Norman, OK

#49814 May 15, 2014
Another Damn Liberal wrote:
Here is what the IPCC is, George. They think a lot harder than you do about Climate Change.
http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization....
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. In the same year, the UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.
The IPCC is a scientific body under the auspices of the United Nations (UN). It reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters.
Thousands of scientists from all over the world contribute to the work of the IPCC on a voluntary basis. Review is an essential part of the IPCC process, to ensure an objective and complete assessment of current information. IPCC aims to reflect a range of views and expertise. The Secretariat coordinates all the IPCC work and liaises with Governments. It is supported by WMO and UNEP and hosted at WMO headquarters in Geneva.
The IPCC is an intergovernmental body. It is open to all member countries of the United Nations (UN) and WMO. Currently 195 countries are members of the IPCC. Governments participate in the review process and the plenary Sessions, where main decisions about the IPCC work programme are taken and reports are accepted, adopted and approved. The IPCC Bureau Members, including the Chair, are also elected during the plenary Sessions.
Because of its scientific and intergovernmental nature, the IPCC embodies a unique opportunity to provide rigorous and balanced scientific information to decision makers. By endorsing the IPCC reports, governments acknowledge the authority of their scientific content. The work of the organization is therefore policy-relevant and yet policy-neutral, never policy-prescriptive.
al gore donated 750,000 to the IPCC. now you tell me, why would he do that ? cant wait to hear this one .... lol
fitness-guru

Norman, OK

#49815 May 15, 2014
for them to continue peddling chit ?
George

Elizabeth, WV

#49816 May 15, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
Congress. Hilarious. They can't decide if there should be a minimum wage increase, if background checks for gun purchases should be expanded or if women should make the same money as men for the same jobs. If we wait for Congress to decide whether or not pollution should be controlled at refineries, we'll run out of oil first.
Can you tell me anything Congress has decided in the past 6 years?
But see according the the Constitution and how our government is set up, yes it is up to Congress. It was specifically set up that way to prevent tyrannical king wanna be's like Obama from decreeing the way it will be. We are a democracy, just because you havent been able to get YOUR way doesnt mean the King should just decree it. Congress decides these things and if they decide to do nothing than that is the way it is. This is the good old USA, not North Korea with a dictator decreeing how it is.
fitness-guru

Norman, OK

#49817 May 15, 2014
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2011/02/19... listen you libbys, weve had enough of your chit. were going to squeeze you.

“Our founders”

Since: May 13

NEVER COMPLIED

#49818 May 15, 2014
Another Damn Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying George posts under another name again, and continues to not understand facts.
You should go back and read when he first came one here (under this name anyway) and how he was calling EVERYONE a liar. It's astonishing. I used to think it was only these steps - George says something dumb. He is paraphrased in a way that makes him see how dumb he sounds. He see show dumb he sounds. Then he starts walking back his comments and calling anyone who paraphrased him a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR. Now it's different. Now he calls anyone who doesn't repeat his exact position verbatim a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR. The AGW/global warming thing is the funniest. We all remember how he said man made global warming is a hoax. That mean, by definition, that George thinks AGW is a hoax. Now, we are all PATHOLOGICAL LIARS unless we include the 94 ridiculous qualifiers he adds - harmful rise (but he won't tell us what a harmless rise is), reducing our output won't help (but increasing will hurt?).

Like I said, logic by George is a fun thing to watch.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Charleston Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Nicole HELMS (Jun '15) 2 min Westside 96
Matt Lauer buys Rand renames it Bigcock WV 7 min An old homie 2
Susan Dey coming to Go Topless Day next year. 11 min Julian 6
Madonna moving to Davis Creek 13 min Julian 2
Callie Carte 16 min cart 11
Spike Lee moving up Wertz Ave. 1 hr An old homie 1
What are the qualifications to become a magistrate 2 hr Drugs are bad 6

Charleston Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Charleston Mortgages