Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- The Origins Of Modern Climate Science
- If An Academic Said It, It Must Be True
- Record Snow Cover
- Stopping Climate Misinformation
Recent Comments
- gordon vigurs on Mainstream Media Analysis Of DOGE
- Bob G on Mainstream Media Analysis Of DOGE
- conrad ziefle on Angry And Protesting
- arn on Angry And Protesting
- Tel on Angry And Protesting
- Bob G on Angry And Protesting
- william on Bad Weather Caused By Racism
- Allan Shelton on Precision Taxation
- arn on Angry And Protesting
- arn on Angry And Protesting
Two island sink beneath the waves. But it’s not sea level rise even though one idiot tried to claim it but was debunked.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13383182
You know, they’ve talked themselves into so many circles, I think even the mush-minded entitlement babies could see gaping holes in the discussion. What would the teachers teach? That warming equals more and less snow? That a hot arctic generates cold energy in the continents only during the winter? Or how about increased atmospheric CO2 corellates to a cooler earth in the last 13 years or so? Are they going to lie to the students and tell them mosquitoes don’t live in cold areas?
I’m just really curious as to what exactly would they teach. Just about any part of the theory is directly refuted by other alamist claims or reality. (Disclaimer! This was consistant would our model of alarmist behavior all along.)
They should be glad it’s not an adult education class…
…first you would have to convince them that weathermen can predict the weather
lol, right. We can predict 20 years into the future!! One week, not so much…….. using the same type of models.
“not only is global warming real, but the effects are already becoming serious”
It would be so nice if they would give evidence for it being real. Just saying so and then telling us that climate science is too complex (it really is not, only modeling it is very complex) for the commoner to understand is inadequate.
Evidence of the effects is also completely missing. That’s fun to be able to say and I can say it with confidence as we are cooling and nothing that they point to can be evidence of what they claim.
Al GOre missed the boat totally as we started really cooling in 2006 when he released his science fiction movie.
“Climate change” should be taught as such, that climate is not a constant and always changes. Also the “scientific method” should be taught, that all of science, even the theories of Newton and Einstein, are subject to review and reexamination. And that Hansen and Mann are not exactly Newton and Einstein.
Parroting unproved dogma as science is not the way to go in a “liberal” education.
Climate Change = Weather
Climate Change has and will aways occur i.e. Weather.
Enough of this scam and play on words.
The jig is almost over.
It’s a true paradox. The “defenders of the science” are exactly the ones that want to teach children anti-scientific concepts such as “this year’s floods can be linked to man-made global warming“.
Sometimes I think we got lucky, the idiots dressed up the issue in political terms from day one at least in the USA, thereby guaranteeing the current conservative backlash. What if they had been smart enough to show an apolitical face at the start, as happened in Europe?