Global warming protesters met by free...

Global warming protesters met by freezing weather and snow

There are 41 comments on the The Daily Caller story from Jan 16, 2013, titled Global warming protesters met by freezing weather and snow. In it, The Daily Caller reports that:

Environmental activists were ironically met with freezing weather and light snow flurries on Monday while protesting global warming outside the Washington state capitol building, reports the Olympian.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Daily Caller.

SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#22 Feb 16, 2013
Copie wrote:
Give us all a break you Global Warming religion cranks. Have you no shame? Trying to convince us tha record cold is really global warming is just sick.
Actually, you need to catch up with this:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Human_Fi...

Any questions?
PHD

Overton, TX

#23 Feb 17, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, you need to catch up with this:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Human_Fi...
Any questions?
More BS from the seconmd commander TROLL!!!

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#24 Feb 17, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>More BS from the seconmd commander TROLL!!!
You don't have any degree, doll.
I have it on record -- straight from you. You messed up.

You're exposed as a fraud for posting as a PHD -- what a laugh#$%
Which is why you SCREAM when someone posts any real science here.
PHD

Overton, TX

#25 Feb 17, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't have any degree, doll.
I have it on record -- straight from you. You messed up.
You're exposed as a fraud for posting as a PHD -- what a laugh#$%
Which is why you SCREAM when someone posts any real science here.
You can’t even be original Commander TROLL!!!! See that Bull S. degree again got you walloped and in the crapper. That Ha HA you hear is the void between your ears called an echo.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#27 Feb 17, 2013
This is a crisis, ph'd. An ID crisis. What are you going to do?
AntiMelting

United States

#28 Feb 17, 2013
Gorebull Warming. Liberals are so dumb.
PHD

Overton, TX

#29 Feb 18, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
This is a crisis, ph'd. An ID crisis. What are you going to do?
There is a new drug discovered spaced out spacedoutblues. Take one pill and you and walloped again and again will wake up felling your--self again and again. Quick go to your local sheeplebot store and get one while you can.

Since: Jul 07

Newport News, VA

#31 Feb 18, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's worse than that.
Climate Expertise Lacking among Global Warming Contrarians
A majority of scientists who dispute global warming lack the climatological expertise to do so
By David Biello June 22, 2010 37
The new analysis, published June 21 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, surveyed 908 researchers publishing in scientific journals from around the world on the subject and found that not only were those in the unconvinced camp less expert in the field, they were also less likely to be trained in the climate science.
"A physicist or geologist with a PhD is a scientist, but not a climate scientist and thus their opinions on complex climatological issues is not likely to be expert opinion," says William Anderegg, lead author of the analysis and a biologist-in-training at Stanford University. "Cardiologists, for example, don't prescribe chemotherapies for cancer, nor do oncologists claim expertise at heart surgery-they are all doctors, of course, but not experts outside of a narrow specialty."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm...
AND,
<< There is, in fact, a climate conspiracy. It just happens to be one launched by the fossil fuel industry to obscure the truth about climate change and delay any action...
As physicist and climate historian Spencer Weart told The Washington Post: "It's a symptom of something entirely new in the history of science: Aside from crackpots who complain that a conspiracy is suppressing their personal discoveries, we've never before seen a set of people accuse an entire community of scientists of deliberate deception and other professional malfeasance. Even the tobacco companies never tried to slander legitimate cancer researchers." Well, probably they did, but point taken.>>
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.c...
kind of like michael mann, the famouse hockey stick graph guy, trying to extrapolate climate significance from tree rings. problem is, he is not a tree expert. whoops! no credible scientist will tell you that this science of climatology is "settled". rather, it is in its infancy.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#32 Feb 18, 2013
GoodNewz wrote:
<quoted text>
kind of like michael mann, the famouse hockey stick graph guy, trying to extrapolate climate significance from tree rings. problem is, he is not a tree expert. whoops! no credible scientist will tell you that this science of climatology is "settled". rather, it is in its infancy.
Good news is that you don't know science to judge science.

Leave the science to scientists. Go back to sleep.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Human_Fi...
PHD

Overton, TX

#33 Feb 18, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Good news is that you don't know science to judge science.
Leave the science to scientists. Go back to sleep.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Human_Fi...
A new drug has been discovered spaced out spacedoutblues. Take one pill and you and walloped again and again will wake up felling your--self again and again. Quick go to your local sheeplebot store and get one while you can.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#34 Feb 18, 2013
GoodNewz wrote:
<quoted text>
kind of like michael mann, the famouse hockey stick graph guy, trying to extrapolate climate significance from tree rings. problem is, he is not a tree expert. whoops! no credible scientist will tell you that this science of climatology is "settled". rather, it is in its infancy.
Actually, I'm going to start where I agree with you.

#1 When in 1998 Michael Mann FIRST issued his original paper on his first reconstruction of tree rings to try and determine world wide temperatures.
his first paper said was a first pass and had uncertainties in it. Indeed the TITLE of his paper was:

** "Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the past millennium: INFERENCES, UNCERTAINTIES, and LIMITATIONS" **

In his paper Mann said "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached and that the uncertainties were the point of the article."[59]

#2 Tree rings can be affected by disease and rainfall.

So Stand alone, tree rings are pretty rotton for determining temperatures across time.

Except. The hockey stock has been validated with other evidence to support it.

I now let NewScientist take over

"...independent evidence, from ice cores and sea sediments for instance, suggest the last time the planet approached this degree of warmth was during the interglacial period preceding the last ice age over 100,000 years ago. It might even be hotter now than it has been for at least a million years.

Further back in the past, though, it certainly has been hotter - and the world has been a very different place. The crucial point is that our modern civilisation has been built on the basis of the prevailing climate and sea levels. As these change, it will cause major problems.

See all climate myths in our special feature.>>

<<In fact, later studies support the key conclusion: the world is warmer now than it has been for at least 1000 years

taken from
Newscientist: Climate myths: The 'hockey stick' graph has been proven wrong

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11646

The National Academy of Sciences was asked by the US Congress to rule on Mann's hockey stick and officially confirmed it BECAUSE of the other independant proxies (bore rings, ice cores, and the like) that showed roughly the same warming trend it did.

So Mann is considered verified by the SCIENCE media, if not by the right wing media.
Come on ThunderChild

East Liverpool, OH

#35 Feb 18, 2013
Freezing weather and snow??????????
Any wingnuts ever hear the word February before?
PHD

Overton, TX

#36 Feb 18, 2013
Bet you can't wait until April gets here.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#37 Feb 18, 2013
PHD wrote:
Bet you can't wait until April gets here.
Summer is the period I dread. And I live in northern Virginia.
See-- nice conversation. So I reply in kind.

Since: Jul 07

Newport News, VA

#38 Feb 18, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Good news is that you don't know science to judge science.
Leave the science to scientists. Go back to sleep.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Human_Fi...
like all those scientists that were predicting the new ice age back in the 70s???

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#39 Feb 18, 2013
GoodNewz wrote:
<quoted text>
like all those scientists that were predicting the new ice age back in the 70s???
What happened in the 1970s, was the discovery of aerosols (pollutants) actually had a cooling affect. Between 1971 and 1974 There were a few science papers that speculated if these aerosols were more powerful than global warming then we could have an ice age.

During this time, many of the mainstream covered this.

By 1974, three years later, the climatologists got better measurements and realized CO2 was the much stronger force.

And during that time (or any time) there was never not one reputable renown scientific agency that said the concensus was global cooling.

While today, ALL of them* say there is global warming and there is a threat.

Ask me for citations on this. I have them.
Trying to make it simple for you.

* Except two petroleum science based organizations that are neutral -- say they don't know.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#40 Feb 18, 2013
Let me give you that list.

**Organizations that say AGW is a FACT**
* National Academy of Sciences, United States [and NAS of every country]
* National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA)
* National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
* National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
* National Science Foundation (NSF)
* American Institute of Physics (AIP)
* American Medical Association (AMA)
* Smithsonian Institution
* International Arctic Science Committee
* Arctic Council
* American Meteorological Society (AMS)
* American Physical Society (APS)
* U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
* The Royal Society of the United Kingdom
* Royal Meteorological Society, UK
* British Antarctic Survey
* European Science Foundation
* Chinese Academy of Sciences
* Académie des Sciences, France
* Institute of Biology, UK
* Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
* Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
* European Federation of Geologists
* European Geosciences Union
* European Physical Society
* U.S. Agency for International Development
* United States Department of Agriculture
* National Institute of Standards and Technology
* United States Department of Defense
* United States Department of Energy
* National Institutes of Health
* United States Department of State
* United States Department of Transportation
* University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
* African Academy of Sciences
* Australian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences
and the Arts
* Academia Brasileira de Ciéncias
* Cameroon Academy of Sciences
* Royal Society of Canada
* Caribbean Academy of Sciences
* Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
* Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina
of Germany
* Indonesian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Irish Academy
* Accademia nazionale delle scienze of Italy
* Indian National Science Academy
* Science Council of Japan
* Kenya National Academy of Sciences
* Madagascar's National Academy of Arts,
* Letters and Sciences
* Academy of Sciences Malaysia
* Academia Mexicana de Ciencias
* Nigerian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Society of New Zealand
* Polish Academy of Sciences
* Russian Academy of Sciences
*l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques
du Sénégal
* Academy of Science of South Africa
* Sudan Academy of Sciences
* Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
* Tanzania Academy of Sciences
* Turkish Academy of Sciences
* Uganda National Academy of Sciences
* Zambia Academy of Sciences
* American Academy of Pediatrics
* American Association for the Advancement
of Science
* American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
* American Astronomical Society
* American Chemical Society
* American College of Preventive Medicine
* American Geophysical Union
* American Public Health Association
* American Quaternary Association
* American Institute of Biological Sciences
* American Society of Agronomy
* American Society for Microbiology
* American Society of Plant Biologists
* American Statistical Association
* Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
* Botanical Society of America
* Crop Science Society of America
* Ecological Society of America
* Federation of American Scientists
* Geological Society of America
* National Association of Geoscience Teachers
* Natural Science Collections Alliance
* Organization of Biological Field Stations
* Society of American Foresters
* Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
* Society of Systematic Biologists
* Soil Science Society of America
* Australian Coral Reef Society
* Australian Medical Association
* Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
* Engineers Australia
* Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
* Geological Society of Australia
* International Association for Great Lakes Research
* International Union for Quaternary Research
* International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
* Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

[had to cut off a few to fit]
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#41 Feb 18, 2013
good snooz wrote:
like all those scientists that were predicting the new ice age back in the 70s???
In the 70's, 44 Science Papers were published in Science Journals about global warming.
Only 7 papers were published about global cooling.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#42 Apr 16, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
In the 70's, 44 Science Papers were published in Science Journals about global warming.
Only 7 papers were published about global cooling.
This means that CAGW has been generally accepted for nearly 40 years.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#43 Apr 16, 2013
GoodNewz wrote:
<quoted text>
like all those scientists that were predicting the new ice age back in the 70s???
I don't know what annoys me most.

Posters with stupid and erronious claims ( www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-... )

Or those who cannot tell the difference between cold WEATHER and a cold CLIMATE as the subject line illustrates.

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.

Activism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Morrissey Says 'The Only Perfect World For Anim... 5 hr NoahLovesU 377
News Standoff over gay marriage licenses wears on, d... 6 hr WasteWater 12
News No ballot photos? ACLU says no way 11 hr rjwampler 1
News New Crowdfunding Campaign Says Polar Bears are ... Aug 26 IB DaMann 1
News Poll: Vast Majority of Americans, Including Afr... Aug 22 Big Knob 2
News Sweden takes on Amnesty International in debate... Aug 21 Fart news 2
News Environmentalists Use 21 Children To Sue Obama ... Aug 20 litesong 2
More from around the web