Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Recycling The Same News Every Century
- Arctic Sea Ice Declining Faster Than Expected
- Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Global Warming Emergency In The UK
- Mainstream Media Analysis Of DOGE
- Angry And Protesting
- Bad Weather Caused By Racism
- “what the science shows”
- Causes Of Earthquakes
- Precision Taxation
- On the Cover Of The Rolling Stone
- Demise Of The Great Barrier Reef
- Net Zero In China
- Make America Healthy Again
- Nobel Prophecy Update
- Grok Defending Climategate
- It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- Creative Marketing
- No Emergency Or Injunction
- The Perfect Car
- “usually the case”
- Same Old Democrats
- Record Arctic Ice Growth
- Climate Change, Income Inequality And Racism
- The New Kind Of Green
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- Bob G on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- arn on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- william on Arctic Sea Ice Declining Faster Than Expected
- conrad ziefle on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- conrad ziefle on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- william on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- gordon vigurs on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Tel on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Bob G on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
97% Of Scientists Believe That Cities Are Built On Mudcracks
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
“unleashed”…sounds about right…
Ah.. the consensus argument yet again. It’s shame these journalists appear to have never heard of Galileo, Einstein, nor of the Scientific Method.
Junk journalism at its best.. or worst, depending on how one looks at it.
Except that in this case, it is even worse. There were only 75 scientists that made up the so-called 97% consensus … the consensus odds were stacked much, much higher against Galileo and Einstein, as I am sure they had at least an 80+ person consensus against them!
97% of climate scientists are apparently feeding at the trough. If nothing is happening, how do they justify their salaries?
That would be ALL 75 of them …
Quite the picture. How can warmer temps. cause melting ice and lower seas at the same time?
If you have to ask that question you have not known anyone who has taken the “Magical Mystery Tour” of the climatology world!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7F2X3rSSCU
Then you have this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA_sVHBNcOU&feature=related
If you do not understand the lyrics of this Climatology song:
“Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up AND THAT’S AN INVITATION, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up TO MAKE A RESERVATION, roll up for the mystery tour.
The magical mystery tour is waiting to take you away,
Waiting to take you away.
Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up WE’VE GOT EVERYTHING YOU NEED, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up SATISFACTION GUARANTEED, roll up for the mystery tour.
The magical mystery tour is hoping to take you away,
Hoping to take you away.
Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up AND THAT’S AN INVITATION, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up TO MAKE A RESERVATION, roll up for the mystery tour.
The magical mystery tour is coming to take you away,
Coming to take you away.
The magical mystery tour is dying to take you away,
Dying to take you away, take you away.
http://taz4158.tripod.com/magical.html
That at least was back in the day when music was really music! Long way down from there to Black Eyed Peas.
That’s a chick? YIKES!
Nicole Hodgson lectures in sustainability at Murdoch University, Western Australia.She is am also the President of the Conservation Council of WA (www.ccwa.org.au) and has a background with NGOs in the sustainability and environmental area.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/nicole-hodgson-2778404.html
What a surprise, Ms. Nicole is on the AGW gravy train.
Maybe if she had a makeover she wouldn’t need to preoccupy herself with this climate nonsense.
So, am I to assume that ALL 75 of those “climate consensus scientists” are to be wrong? … I see what she means. I don’t see how that is plausible. All 75 of them? .. come on… /sarc