Bloggers Fighting Climate Fraud – For 110 Years

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Bloggers Fighting Climate Fraud – For 110 Years

  1. Andy DC says:

    Was wondering what reason there would be to lie about the weather in 1907. After all, the Government was not giving away huge sums of money for the study of global warming, climate change or whatever. The reason given was speculative land booms.

  2. Thomas Robbins says:

    I was wondering the Same Andy DC – I can imagine some broad topics, but I would love to find out the specifics as well.. Kind of Ironic it is on the NOAA website – maybe they need to include this in their orientation classes.. ;)

  3. Steve Case says:

    If you follow Tony’s link
    and read the entry titled “IS NOT HONESTY THE BEST POLICY” the author C.A. you will come to this paragraph:

    … we are told that the frost and freezes in one State, droughts and rains in another, earthquakes in still another, the tornadoes of some regions and the hurricanes of others are matters about which “mum is the word”; that Weather Bureau men must not publish honest reports on these subjects because of the injury to local business enterprises and land booms, and that when they do make honest reports they must suffer attacks from those who wish to suppress the truth.

    Tony’s headline about fighting climate fraud seems to be spot on.

  4. Pathway says:

    Here is Dr. Mann’s testimony to the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
    He is quite the victim of science deniers.

    • Andy DC says:

      I leafed through Mann’s crock of BS and I have never heard of such a pompous, whiney, self-rightous CRY BABY! Just keeps regurgitating the tired old party line, can never admit that he could ever be wrong.

      Who are the other three and what do they have to say?

      • AndyG55 says:

        Notice that he went straight for the CONsensus and the 97% malarkey. !

        Why would anyone use the 97% fraud, when it is so easily proven as fraud ????

        Its almost as if he is trying to discredit himself.

    • AndyG55 says:

      Josh says it oh so nicely.

      • Steve Case says:

        Here’s my comment on today’s testimony:

        Good God! Nowhere in all of that did any one of those “Scientists” who are supposedly on my side of things mention any of those things that are beneficial about CO2. And (in the last few minutes) Judith Curry signs onto a 50/50 chance that “Climate Change” is a problem! For God’s sake, get someone in front of a congressional committee who understands what this is all about and knows what to say.

        • Steve Case says:

          You think that’s harsh? Sue me!

        • Andy DC says:

          I guess she wanted to appear reasonable rather dogmatic in order to appeal to the people in the middle of the political spectrum. To contrast herself to a raving semi-lunatic like Dr. Mann.

          • Steve Case says:

            I would have pointed out that in the past there has been more CO2 and more methane in the air, and we’re still here.

            Pointing out that we are a carbon based life form and that every carbon atom in our bodies was once part of a CO2 molecule in the atmosphere wouldn’t have been a negative.

            Bringing up longer growing seasons, more rain and more arable would also have been good.

            Did our three stooges even talk to each other before that testimony? You can bet that the stinking democrats do. They always get their talking points in order.

  5. RAH says:

    I have no idea what everyone thought was accomplished in that meeting other than making it clear just what a pompous loser Mann is and making it clear that Congressman Bill Foster from IL would have made a heck of a good attorney.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.