Garbage in, "Gospel" out

All hail the liberal orthodoxy of "climate change consensus", which brands as "flat-earthers" anyone guilty of expecting scientific proof before turning their lives over to Al Gore.

Seems like the heretics won't be burned at the stake just yet. (After all, that might consume precious tropical hardwoods and add CO2 to our atmosphere).

Research now says that ocean currents - not American consumers driving SUVs largely determine the temperature of our planet in the short term.

When the UN "World Meteorological Organization" admitted that temperatures have not actually warmed since 1998, the excuse given by Secretary-General Michel Jarraud was that La Nina, "part of what we call 'variability,'" was to blame for interrupting Al Gore's cash flow.

3,000 automated ocean buoys have ben deployed worldwide since 2003 at various depths, and the data they've provided doesn't fit the Global Warming religion's orthodoxy.

In fact, the data suggests that the oceans are actually cooling - gasp -, and coupled with recent evidence showing Antartica has more pack ice now than it did in the past, carbon credits may soon join pet rocks as passe'.
 
you know what I find very interesting? It's how the recent cooling is explained away as masking the AGW. When, during periods of warming, any mention of natural sources contributing to the warming are met with assurances that it's all anthro-warming. Now, how can natural variations outpace anthro on one hand and be insignifigant on the other? The question that is never answered is WHAT PORTION OF THE WARMING WE SAW IN THE 90'S WAS DUE TO NATURAL VARIATION?
 
bump for the warmers.

Answer the question, lorax or cypress.
I doubt you can. You guys will ignore this completely.
 
Back
Top