Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, right we should believe this nut...Booker has opposed the scientific consensus on numerous issues including global warming, the link between second-hand smoke and cancer, and the negative health effects of asbestos.
Climate change skeptics like to point to 1934 in the U.S. as proof that recent hot years are not unusual. However, this is another example of "cherry-picking" a single fact that supports a claim, while ignoring the rest of the data. Globally, the ten hottest years on record have all occurred since 1998, with 2005 and 2010 as the hottest.
Yeah, right we should believe this nut...Booker has opposed the scientific consensus on numerous issues including global warming, the link between second-hand smoke and cancer, and the negative health effects of asbestos.
Climate change skeptics like to point to 1934 in the U.S. as proof that recent hot years are not unusual. However, this is another example of "cherry-picking" a single fact that supports a claim, while ignoring the rest of the data. Globally, the ten hottest years on record have all occurred since 1998, with 2005 and 2010 as the hottest.
Here we go. Stop and do a google search. These folks along with many many nut balls calling themselves scientists have been faking data for years.
Most of these folks admit to changing the data.. Suckers born every minute and the hilarious part is? Well, liberals rail against the rich and these folks keep feeding you horse manure to make themselves richer and you sit down with silverware and a napkin then ask for seconds. I love it when you post how right they are without lifting a single finger to even see if anyone might be blowing smoke up your hooter.. You were a good liberal though and used option b) attack the source, from the liberal handbook. If that doesn't work I suggest using c) it's Bushes fault!
I believe in climate change, I don't think anyone is disputing that. But I think man made contributions to Global Warming, while real, has been over exaggerated for political purposes. If people dropped the agendas and were more honest about this topic, we could come together and talk about realistic solutions to our environmental problems, and what can, and cannot, be prevented.
One thing though, these "dooms day" scenarios that the Man made Global Warming advocates preach is not realistic at all.
I believe in climate change, I don't think anyone is disputing that. But I think man made contributions to Global Warming, while real, has been over exaggerated for political purposes. If people dropped the agendas and were more honest about this topic, we could come together and talk about realistic solutions to our environmental problems, and what can, and cannot, be prevented.
One thing though, these "dooms day" scenarios that the Man made Global Warming advocates preach is not realistic at all.
I have come across a number of people here who don't even think climate change is real.
I wonder how many times global warming believers can be wrong before they are no longer regarded as science....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You were a good liberal though and used option b) attack the source, from the liberal handbook. If that doesn't work I suggest using c) it's Bushes fault!
