More Global Warming Fraud

[Spike]

NOAA Changes Temperature Data to Eliminate Warming ‘Hiatus’ to Conform to Global Warming Theory

Scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have been caught jiggering the temperature data in order to wipe out the well-known 15-year warming hiatus so that their new data will continue to affirm the global warming theory, a report says.

NOAA fiddled around with the data to try and minimize the fact that no global warming has occurred over the last 15 years because it conflicts with their global warming religion.

http://breaking.cyber1news.com/news...hiatusx92-to-conform-to-global-warming-theory

--------------

shocking

 

[Confluence]

So, to summarize:

They were completely freaked it was gonna get really warm

So they changed a bunch of rules and laws that looked like tax measures

Then it didn't get warm at all

Then -- wait a minute --- It did. It did get warm, if you look at this one new way!!

All good here!

This is still the biggest threat to whirled peas, even if we can't describe it.

 

[SteelChip]

This is still the biggest threat to whirled peas, even if we can't describe it.

 

[ark steel]

This is still the biggest threat to whirled peas, even if we can't describe it.

The Big O did say it causes terrorism...

 

[Spike]

De-fund!


House Panel passes measure cutting EPA's budget

WASHINGTON (AP) — A House panel passed a spending measure on Wednesday that cuts the budget at the Environmental Protection Agency by 9 percent and blocks the Obama administration from advancing new rules to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Republicans used their majority to pass the bill by voice vote. Now, the $30.2 billion measure funding the Interior Department, EPA and other agencies moves to the full House Appropriations Committee for consideration.

Overall, the bill cuts spending by $246 million from current levels and $3 billion below what President Barack Obama had sought. The EPA takes one of the biggest hits. It's targeted for a $718 million cut from current levels.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/930d...6c42/panel-passes-measure-cutting-epas-budget

 

[SteelChip]

De-fund!

 

[Ron Burgundy]

De-fund!


House Panel passes measure cutting EPA's budget

WASHINGTON (AP) — A House panel passed a spending measure on Wednesday that cuts the budget at the Environmental Protection Agency by 9 percent and blocks the Obama administration from advancing new rules to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Republicans used their majority to pass the bill by voice vote. Now, the $30.2 billion measure funding the Interior Department, EPA and other agencies moves to the full House Appropriations Committee for consideration.

Overall, the bill cuts spending by $246 million from current levels and $3 billion below what President Barack Obama had sought. The EPA takes one of the biggest hits. It's targeted for a $718 million cut from current levels.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/930d...6c42/panel-passes-measure-cutting-epas-budget

Call your Representatives and urge him/her to vote for the REINS Act. This proposed law will require a Congressional vote to approve any regulation that will cost more than $100 million.

 

[SteelChip]

Call your Representatives and urge him/her to vote for the REINS Act. This proposed law will require a Congressional vote to approve any regulation that will cost more than $100 million.

Some of them just don't wanna hear it JonBoy.......

June 16, 2015 House Republican leaders are cracking down on rebellious members after a near-disaster on a trade vote last week.

Reps. Cynthia Lummis, Steve Pearce, and Trent Franks have been removed from the whip team after they sided with GOP rebels to vote against a rule governing debate on a trade bill, according to sources close to the team. But Boehner has by and large shied away from public displays of disunity, choosing instead to exact subtle retribution behind closed doors. Those members say they have found it harder to get their bills considered and have received less fundraising help from the party infrastructure

 

[ark steel]

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-climate-change-deniers-got-it-very-wrong

97% consensus is now 99.9%!!! Winning!!

 

[Spike]

more than 99.9%, according to a new study reviewed by MSNBC.

ha, the same folks that insist that Bruce Jenner is a real woman now, even if he still has a dick



There was also a time with 99.999% agreement among scientists that the earth was the center of the universe.

Michael Crichton on science and consensus:

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period

 

[SteelChip]

If anybody needed more proof that this Global Warming/Climate Change business is about the money not the planet, they need not look any further than the O-Man his own self.

The White House Wants Your Doctor To Teach You About Global Warming

Americans trust their doctors, so the White House wants these medical professionals to be a mouthpiece for President Obama’s global warming agenda.

“We also need doctors, nurses and citizens, like all of you”President Obama said in a taped speech presented to medical professionals gathered at the White House, “to get to work to raise awareness and organize folks for real change.”

The central message: doctors should warn their patients that global warming could make their health worse.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/25/t...our-doctor-to-teach-you-about-global-warming/

Sometimes I wonder just how many times the Left has to be proven wrong before they give up the argument. Then I remember they have won a number of points by simply stating bullshit facts over and over 'till people actually start to believe them.

 

[Confluence]

If anybody needed more proof that this Global Warming/Climate Change business is about the money not the planet, they need not look any further than the O-Man his own self.

The White House Wants Your Doctor To Teach You About Global Warming

Americans trust their doctors, so the White House wants these medical professionals to be a mouthpiece for President Obama’s global warming agenda.

“We also need doctors, nurses and citizens, like all of you”President Obama said in a taped speech presented to medical professionals gathered at the White House, “to get to work to raise awareness and organize folks for real change.”

The central message: doctors should warn their patients that global warming could make their health worse.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/25/t...our-doctor-to-teach-you-about-global-warming/

Sometimes I wonder just how many times the Left has to be proven wrong before they give up the argument. Then I remember they have won a number of points by simply stating bullshit facts over and over 'till people actually start to believe them.

Not so fast, there is still a couple days left and the sun gods are angry

 

[Steeltime]

Regarding MSNBC and the claimed 99.9% ...

First, do we believe that the guy actually read 24,000 peer reviewed papers? I don't. He read something called the abstracts for the papers, and then reached a conclusion as to whether or not the paper "supported" AGW based on a reading of the abstract.

Second, this lie about "consensus" has already been analyzed and disproved. Specifically, this author found numerous articles cited in the "97%" claim and asked the authors if the guy claiming that the articles "supported" AGW was giving an accurate recitation of what the article did or was meant to do. Dozens of cited articles were misqualified as "supporting" AGW, according to the authors of the articles.

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html

Third, the 97% figure was later claimed to have been derived from a very narrow categorization of scientists, 77 of whom qualified and responded, and based on two questions. This very lengthy article discusses why the oft-cited 97% figure is false and intentionally designed to mislead the public:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

The "new" number - 99.9% - is just a corrupted variation on the already-disproved approach from Cook in 2013. Instead of a phony, demonstrably false claim about consensus, why don't we look at actual temperature readings over the past 18 years, while CO2 levels have skyrocketed??

The actual temperature data show a very slight increase in northern hemisphere temperatures between 1997 and 2015, a slight decrease in the southern hemisphere readings over that same time span, and overall a slight decrease in temperatures based on observed data.