Who would win in war between Liberals and Conservatives?

17810121321

Comments

  • "You have access to google so google it. "

    Ok, let us search: : "is the 97 consensus real"....give me a moment...ah, alright, looking through the articles the only ones that come from responsible, scientific sites, and not by blogs and newspapers, are...

    NASA: https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

    and...

    Scientific American: https://scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-determine-the-scientific-consensus-on-global-warming/

    So it looks like...you're wrong. Better luck next time?
  • Cherry picking is nice but try looking at papers that disagreed with your liberal CG narrative. Hahaha, let me repeat again the 97% came about from the smaller percentage of overall datas, the man took the minority % that agreed with climate change and disregarded the majority % of the papers that disagreed with CW. You claim to be smart but i keep telling you how the man came up with the 97% which was the minority of the overall data. Hahaha some smart girl you are indeed.


    1. Climate Change: No, It's Not a 97 Percent Consensus
    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/97-percent-solution-ian-tuttle

    2. DR.Spencer: The 97% consensus is BOGUS! CLICK IMAGE TO PLAY!


    3. former noaa scientist confirms colleagues manipulated climate records
    https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records

    Oh let not forget the 31,000 scientists who signed a petition that called CW/CG a HOAX/Junk Science

    4. Over 31,000 scientists say global warming is a total hoax; now they’re speaking out against junk science
    https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-09-21-over-31000-scientists-say-global-warming-is-a-total-hoax-now-theyre-speaking-out-against-junk-science.html

    BWAHAHAHAHA, THAT PSYCHOTIC LIBERAL ILLNESS IS SHOWING JIMMY!
  • "but try looking at papers that disagreed with your liberal CG narrative. "

    I've asked you for papers on your side dozens of times.

    "again the 97% came about from the smaller percentage of overall datas, the man took the minority % that agreed with climate change and disregarded the majority % of the papers that disagreed with CW. You claim to be smart but i keep telling you how the man came up with the 97% which was the minority of the overall data. Hahaha some smart girl you are indeed. "

    Some narrative you've thought up. It's wrong. Sorry man.

    Not a single scientific paper cited?

    "BWAHAHAHAHA, THAT PSYCHOTIC LIBERAL ILLNESS IS SHOWING JIMMY!"

    I'm imagining him curled up in a ball on the floor, hands wrapped around his knees, rocking back and forth laughing maniacally and speaking to himself (ie Jimmy). "I'm not ILL! It's those liberals! Jimmy is NORMAL BWAHA! Jimmy isn't physiologically unstable BWAHA! No matter what my doctor says; he's a doctor so he's probably a no good LIBERAL HAHA! CRAZY? I'm not CRAZY! Who're you calling CRAZY doc?! You evil LIBERAL!"
  • Here's how you cite papers, lad:

    Consensus among scientific papers:

    Cook et al. 2013
    Oreskes 2004
    Shwed and Bearman 2010
    Anderegg et al. 2010

    Consensus among scientists:

    Doran and Zimmerman 2009
    Anderegg et al. 2010
    Bray 2010
    Bray and von Storch 2007
    Verheggen et al. 2014
    Rosenberg et al. 2010
    Farnsworth and Lichter 2012
    Stenhouse et al. 2014
    Carlton et al. 2015

    All you have are articles, a single scientist on YouTube, and a bogus petition.
  • Wow 13 peer reviews papers that advocates that alleged that climate warming real. Wow 13 papers vs 31,000 scientists with PH.Ds that say Climate change is false. Wow 13 papers from 13 scientists so global warming is real. Wow. On the other hand we have 31,000 scientists who says its false. Wow them 13 scientists must represent the majority. Hahahaba

    FACTS
    12,000 peer reviews were analyzed of that 4.3% were of the peer review papers were in favor of global warming. 4.3% out out of 12,000 is 516, so 516 papers were in favor of global warming while 95.7% of the 12,000 peer review were of the opinion that global warming is not happening. So 95.7% of 12,000=11,484. 11,484 peer reviews disagree yet 4.3%/516 became the majority. Hahaha

    The 97% consensus agreeing with global warmint is false! But then again liberals aren't too good at math or facts. According to the liberals 4.3%/516 is greater then 95.7%/11,484.

    11,484 of the peer reviews disagreed with global warming yet somehow the the minority 4.3%/516 became the majority and whola the 97% consensus paper you keep bringing up.

    Only in the liberal psychotic mind will this BS be True.

    Hahaha
  • FACTs

    1. 95.7%/11,484 of the 12,000 disagree with global warming.

    2. 31,000 American scientists signed a petition against global warming.

    3. 4.3%/516 of the 12,000 peer reviews agreed with global warming.

    4. Majority of global warming reviews along with majority of SCIENTIST disagree with global warming.

    Conclusion: Global warming is a LIE.

    They say the global warming is true so shouldn't there be less cold weather?

    CNN 3 days ago: Record cold, heavy snow grips much of the US, with more on the way
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/30/us/us-winter-weather/index.html

    Sky News Today: Bone-chilling temperatures are set to give way to heavy snow in parts of the northeastern US, with some areas set for 15 inches.
    https://news.sky.com/story/heavy-snow-set-to-hit-freezing-us-states-as-record-breaking-cold-snap-continues-11193612
  • Global warming is NOT a LIE! We, Micronesian, shouldn't say so since we're experiencing the effect of climate change. For example, sea level rise and rise in the average temperature!!!!!
  • One nation don’t worry. Porn star is citing Trump University science studies.
  • One Nation, this isn't the first time the sea level has rised. It has happened during the past before the westerners arrived in Micronesia, before the industrial revolution which liberals claim is the source of climate change. My ancestors in Kapingamarangi left instructions to their descendants on how to battle sea level rise. One of these instructions is to plant plants next to the shore so that these plants roots can hold the ground together. Another instructions was don't destroy the corals or the reefs.

    As we know the islands of Micronesia are above sea water because of the corals. This tells us that our ancestors also witnessed sea level rise hundreds of years before the white man came to Micronesia.

    The climate is always changing. From ice age to ice age melting so its obvious why the sea level rises. The earth has gone through climate change for millions of years before man walked the earth.

    @redsnapper, im citing raw unemotional and unpoliticized scientific opinion on the matter.
  • Pawnstar is right though this isn't the first or the last time the waters have risen. The bible talk about a flood 5-6 thousand years ago. Was it global warming or act of god? Elders back in Pohnpei and kosrae say this ain't new meaning the also witnessed it in the past. This whole global warming topic is way too politicized. Especially by the left. Its a source of money for some and a vote getter for many.
  • Smart people don’t brag about how smart they are, rich people don’t brag about their wealth, honest people don’t tell people to “believe me”. Orange monkey does this on a daily basis and exposes the fraud that he really is. Sorry porn star and ironic douche are a couple of baboons that fell for orange monkeys childish self serving ways.
  • @redsnapper, this is about global warming and many scientists disagree with it but nice to see that you are obsessed with Trump.


    image

    Smart: He beat career politicians in the race for the Whitehouse.

    Rich: He is $3-4 billion in the bank.

    Believe me: He's doing all the things he said he would do if he gets elected. Obamacare is dead. Black chimps legacy is no more.


    I bet you follow him on twitter ha red. You are hooked crazy for Trump like your friends in the media and democratic party.


    MAGA
  • Guess who's back, back again, rastas back tell friend.

    Troll king Pawnstar why do you waste your time with these liberal peasants? You already own them already.
  • Because the liberal peasants worship him (Pawnstar).
  • They are my children, liberal they maybe, ignorant to facts they but the King does not forsake them. Im trying my best to reform these liberal children of mine from their erroneous ways.
  • "Pawnstar is right though this isn't the first or the last time the waters have risen."

    At this rate globally? This is only surpassed by mass extinction-esque disasters.

    "The bible talk about a flood 5-6 thousand years ago. "

    The Bible is wrong.

    "Especially by the left."

    For decades politicians were paid off by oil companies to dismiss global warming. Now it's only the right who are puppets for Exxon and its contemporaries. Sure, it's politicized by all sides, as is every issue, but especially by the left? I dare ask if you're not joking.
  • Well, laddy, I understand you're very much focussed on this petition. As such, I've prepared a few questions aimed to test your understanding of science and of the petition. Please do not try to dodge them. Consider how it will look if you cannot answer a few basic questions. The questions are as follows:

    1. Who could sign this petition? What were the restrictions?

    2. What characterizes an argument from authority?

    3. Do petitions have any place in the scientific method?

    4. Is the petition accepted as evidence by any major scientific organization? Do any support this petition?
  • @redsnapper, thats all? Cat/puss got your tonge? Silly peasant.

    @SeeminglyNefarious

    The Bible is wrong

    New Evidence Suggests Biblical Great Flood Happened
    "By carbon dating shells found along the shoreline, Ballard said he believes they have established a timeline for that catastrophic event, which he estimates happened around 5,000 BC. Some experts believe this was around the time when Noah's flood could have occurred"
    http://abcnews.go.com/amp/Technology/evidence-suggests-biblical-great-flood-noahs-time-happened/story?id=17884533

    That's from liberal pro global warming ABC News.

    Look beyond religious side of the bible and look into the historic context of it. Its a history book spanning to 5,000 years ago. And guess what water did rise its noted in the bible.

    All the answers to your 4 questions will be answered on the home page of the petition listed below. You claim to be smart go the website with your questions in hand and read away.
    http://www.petitionproject.org

    3,766 Signers out of 31,487 are Americans the rest are scientists from other parts of the world.

    Yup 31,000+ scientists are being paid by Exxon to lie about global warming. You sir are conspiracy nut. I bet you also think world jewry control the world.


    Al core the father of the liberal global warming tweeted a few days ago and he said in his tweet and quote: "global warming means bitter cold" unquote. Hahaha. He is saying its getting cold as hell because of global warming. Shouldn't it be getting hot as hell because of global warming? Hahaha
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/25446/al-gore-global-warming-means-bitter-cold-duh-joseph-curl
  • image

    As you can see this has happened before. The world climate has changed from cold to hot from the las 120,000 years. This ain't new. Its a cycle thay keeps repeating. From cold/ice age to warm. This cycle keeps repeating. And it will continue long after humans leave earth or become extinct.
  • Pawnstar, I asked those question so that you would read the petition. The link does not answer questions 2, 3, or 4, so I still await answers on those. 31,000 scientists did not sign the petition. According to the National Center for Educational statistics, 10,600,000 students graduate college each year with the qualifications to sign that petition, so 31,000 is nothing. So 10 million graduate a year, let's say those who signed are mostly between the ages of 24 and 80. So 56 year span, more or less. 56 years x 10 million per year, so that's 560 million. That means out of the number of people who had the qualifications to sign the petition, roughly 0.0005% did sign it. 0.0005%! And you think that's a lot?

    The people who signed it did not have to have a PhD in anything. Certainly they did not need to have any background in climatology.

    On top of that, a petition has no place in science! That's called an argument from authority. https://www.nature.com/articles/493480a

    Why would you trust a bogus petition over scientific studies and research? Someone's being quite biased.
  • Pawnstar, I searched that graph you posted, and traced it back to this site: http://thebritishgeographer.weebly.com/sea-level-change.html

    Which says:
    "The rate sea level increase of today is associated with the accelerated greenhouse effect caused by human activity."
  • What I find funny is even creationists don't believe that's evidence. Creation Ministries International wrote an article titled: "Claim Robert Ballard discovered Noah’s Flood in the Black Sea is not correct"
    https://creation.com/Robert-Ballard-did-not-discover-Noahs-Flood

    Dr. Ballard never said the entire globe was flooded. The article says:
    "The theory goes on to suggest that the story of this traumatic event, seared into the collective memory of the survivors, was passed down from generation to generation and eventually inspired the biblical account of Noah."


    So these large floods inspired the myth of Noah's Flood. Pawnstar, why did you not read the article before posting? It actually proves you incorrect by demonstrating Noah's Flood was a myth inspired by large local floods.
  • @SeeminglyNefarious

    National Center for Educational statistics, 10,600,000 students graduate college each year with the qualifications to sign that petition, so 31,000 nothing.

    Apple and oranges, Jimmy apple and oranges. College degree attained after high school you forgot to mention. The most popular college majors are communication, business, political science , Englis,
    Nursing, criminal justice and the liberal leaning millennials favorite Liberal arts. Are these after college after high school degree holder's on the same educational field as a doctorate Ph.d/doctored and scientists? All 31,000 singers went spend close to 8.2 years of schools to earn a Ph.d, and another 4 years to be scientist.14 years of schooling vs 2/years of associate degree or liberal arts or business degrees. Who would you believe a ph.d/scientist or a liberal arts/business/classical language degree holder? All 31,000 signers have 434,000 years of education combined. Ph.d/scientists vs a liberal arts degree holder in a debate on climate change who would you trust?
  • i>On top of that, a petition has no place in science! That's called an argument from authority.

    science is not a consensus for data always change! Yet you believed the 97% scientists consensus fairy tale.

    argument from authority.

    like 12,000 peer reviews on climate change which a minority 4.3% agreed with climate change while 95.7% of the 12,000 peer reviews disagreed with global warming. Yet has a liberal you claim the minority 4.3% is the argumentative authority on climate change.

    Greenhouse effect is normal while climate warming is made up. You missed the point of the seal level history graph. Which was that sea level rise has happened before and is nothing new.

    What I find funny is even creationists don't believe that's evidence. Creation Ministries International wrote an article titled: "Claim Robert Ballard discovered Noah’s Flood in the Black Sea is not correct"

    These are the same guys that beleived the tyrannosaurus rex was a vegeterian before adam and eve ate that apple. This tells you creation ministry international believe Humans and dinosaurs walked the earth the same time. The CMI does not speak for the Christian world.

    Check this out.

    Paleontologists brought to tears, laughter by Creation Museum

    " It's sort of a monument to scientific illiteracy, isn't it?" said Jerry Lipps, professor of geology, paleontology and evolution at University of California, Berkeley".

    Creationism is a theory not supported by most mainstream Christian churches.
    https://phys.org/news/2009-06-paleontologists-brought-laughter-creation-museum.html


    Nice job citing a punch of lunatics as your argumentative authority here Jimmy. Whats next you going to cite them Scientology loonies too?
  • Abc news is liberal leaning organization but it reported that the floods during Noahs time happened. This was before it when totally liberal. Abc might be a liberal news outlet but it has more credibility then the loonies of creation ministry international who beleived the T-rex was a vegetarian. Hahahaha

    I like this becaue the more we talk the more i keep ripping you apart.
  • "Abc might be a liberal news outlet but it has more credibility then the loonies of creation ministry international who beleived the T-rex was a vegetarian. "

    That's the point! I cited Creation Ministries International because they're a nonsense organization. Even the most gullible creationists don't believe your evidence for the flood, a flood which they wholeheartedly believe in. Even these nuts aren't as gullible and misinformed as you.
  • On the petition, again you missed the point. Read the petition page, it says:
    "31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs"

    The point is, 10,600,000 people a year graduate with degrees in some field of science, and therefor are qualified to sign the petition. No, you do not need PhDs. You certainly need no background whatsoever in climate science.

    "You missed the point of the seal level history graph. Which was that sea level rise has happened before and is nothing new."

    No, my good man, you missed the point. Just read the page where you got that graph from, it explains right there why you're wrong. Why do you keep taking images from webpages that prove you wrong?
Sign In or Register to comment.