About Climate Skeptics

re Climate Skeptics About section on websites:

"The goal of Skeptical Science is to explain what peer reviewed science has to say about global warming. When you peruse the many arguments of global warming skeptics, a pattern emerges. Skeptic arguments tend to focus on narrow pieces of the puzzle while neglecting the broader picture. For example, focus on Climategate emails neglects the full weight of scientific evidence for man-made global warming."

We focus on the lies and the little facts that can falsify arguments. Its up to the folks that are putting forth the hypothesis to come up with unfalsifiable evidence and its up to us to falsify those arguments. That's how science works. If anywhere in your hypothesis it says "2+2=5" and we point it out then we win. Its that simple. Climate fascists have to correct their work, not accuse us of not "looking at the broader picture". There have been some huge lies and/or errors. One can watch the movie Global Warming or Global Governance or The Great Global Warming Swindle to see what real climate scientists say about the practice of science inside the UN's IPCC.

We do not have to look at big pictures, only find little lies and sometimes big lies. Bad data collection is a form of lie. If the pro ACCer's are intentionally misleading and twisting and changing their arguments we only need to point that out.

This "about" section shows how little climate skeptics knows about science, or how stupid they think their readers are. More than likely, the latter.


Later in the same page it states:

"Skeptical Science is maintained by John Cook, the Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute at the University of Queensland. He studied physics at the University of Queensland, Australia. After graduating, he majored in solar physics in his post-grad honours year."

So obviously this guy isn't stupid when it comes to science. He just thinks his readers are.

You can never underestimate the greenies lack of understanding when it comes to science. Many claim to be looking at the science when they have only a bachelors degree in something like biology. Climate Science is applied math, and understood at this level by a very few. Fortunately, for our side, we only have to point out the lies and where they say "2+2=5". I know it doesn't seem fair to the twisted leftist mind, but its just logic.

Naomi Shocking Us Into Green Communism Based on AGW fraud

Naomi Klein, author of the famous book, The Shock Doctrine, showed us the value of shock in leading us into the fraudulent war on terror. She has written another book, using the methods given in The Shock Doctrine to shock us into United Nations Agenda 21 based on the phoney AGW threat.

The Rhodes Scholar seems to have followed lessons that she learned from the US Neocons to shock us into helping the global financiers in establishing their Neoliberal Green communist agenda (Agenda 21 / Sustainable Development) New World Order.

She has an interview of the Ford Foundation funded Democracy Now! Here

So you don't have to buy her stupid book.

She says we must transform the economy to reduce "emissions" - of carbon, I assume. I think the only emissions we need to worry about are those emanating from people like Naomi Klein.

Its important to know that burning hydrocarbons has the by products of water and carbon dioxide. (That "smoke" you see coming out of "smoke stacks" of Western clean burning coal burning plants in AGW propaganda is actually water). Both of these are life giving gases.

In the Chinese coal plants? Who knows. They don't have regulations over there and the Neoliberal Rhodes Scholar isn't pushing for trade sanctions against China and their slave factories to reduce real harmful rather than imaginary harmful emissions that are the result of by-products emitted by dirty plants without 'scrubbers'.

Naomi's argument is a scientific one - we must stop putting "carbon", meaning CO2, into the environment to stop global warming. Really CO2 isn't bad for the environment according to qualified folks.

The science behind the pro AGW movement has always been political science and the science behind the anti AGW movement has always been the hard kind.You don't see qualified folks like this on Naomi's side of things, you see people like....well....Naomi. They always say they have qualified people behind them, you just never hear from these qualified people. They have corporate media to repeat their mantra until it gets believed.

The rest of the interview is such BS that I can't even pollute my keyboard by repeating it here. She says "We must invest more in the public sphere...." - just to warn you. You won't believe it if I just write it all here anyhow. See for yourself at the Ford Foundation media outlet linked above.