How can democrats, liberals, leftwingers and women be so stupid?

[amicus]

Originally Posted by richard_daily

You're a little slow... It's ok, I realize you're old and feeble.

I was talking about you.

~~~

Oh, really I rather turned it on you, didn't I?

by accident ya think?

you dumb fucking polock...go back to europe with the rest of the trash


amicus

[richard_daily]

Originally Posted by amicus

~~~

Oh, really I rather turned it on you, didn't I?

by accident ya think?

you dumb fucking polock...go back to europe with the rest of the trash


amicus

No, you didn't really... but self-awareness isn't exactly your strong suit, so I forgive you.

[JackLuis]

Ami, you certainly know how to stir the pot. I can't believe these fuckers take you seriously,

[amicus]

Originally Posted by JackLuis

Ami, you certainly know how to stir the pot. I can't believe these fuckers take you seriously,

~~~

I am and always have been as serious as a snake bite, Jack Luis and you know it.

Chinzy of you to suggest otherwise, you stooping to the dregs of the left now with yoiur scrurilous lies?

Read my book, it is free, I am calling for a Revolution, izzat serious enuf fer ya?

amicus

[amicus]

Originally Posted by richard_daily

No, you didn't really... but self-awareness isn't exactly your strong suit, so I forgive you.

~~~

Richard Dally, the self confessed anti semite and jew hater is now trying to ooze out of it...good luck on that you fucking Nazi.

amicus

[badbabysitter]

Originally Posted by amicus

~~~

Richard Dally, the self confessed anti semite and jew hater is now trying to ooze out of it...good luck on that you fucking Nazi.

amicus

a racist homophobe that wants to deny the right to vote to half the population...is calling someone else a Nazi?

you're really not too bright

[the_kuntess]

Originally Posted by JackLuis

Ami, you certainly know how to stir the pot. I can't believe these fuckers take you seriously,

No one takes him seriously.
He is entertainment value only

[richard_daily]

Originally Posted by JackLuis

Ami, you certainly know how to stir the pot. I can't believe these fuckers take you seriously,

I don't think anyone is taking him seriously.

[LillyO]

This is not the same amicus that was here before. The previous one was a drunk idiot.

This one's responses are completely different. Familiar but different.

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Originally Posted by amicus

~~~

From previous experience, I know that your idiocy is not ust a one time thing, you are always stupid/ Just as water vapor ranges from zero to seven on one scale, zero being in the desert with no humidity, so to does Co2, high over the mouth of a volcano, low in the middle of nowhere.

you failed to notice the word 'range' which all such statistics are subject to and rom which arise an average. The average did not rise and still has not over more than two hundred years.

Math not your strong suit, dogshit?

amicus

Actually, dumbass. I can call you dumbass right? Of course I can, you flaunt it enough that your common name is now common knowledge.

Atmospheric CO2 levels has been steadily increasing, and according to Scripps CO2 data is at an all time high of just over 396.8 ppm as of the latest available data from February. Starting March 1958, the Scripps Mauna Loa data is the longest-runing, high-precision instrument record for atmospheric CO2. But you can check their data yourself..
Monthly data
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
Annual data
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/tren...nnmean_mlo.txt


So your 'range' is bullshit, like the majority of your blather. The increase is even more than I previously posted, and hardly virtually constant.

[Cade Is Here]

Originally Posted by amicus

~~~

I am and always have been as serious as a snake bite, Jack Luis and you know it.

Chinzy of you to suggest otherwise, you stooping to the dregs of the left now with yoiur scrurilous lies?

Read my book, it is free, I am calling for a Revolution, izzat serious enuf fer ya?

amicus

Good thread, look at the idiots from the left replying to you.

Do you think that anyone of these creatures can think for themselves? They usually require an occasional burping..

[amicus]

Originally Posted by Ulaven_Demorte

Actually, dumbass. I can call you dumbass right? Of course I can, you flaunt it enough that your common name is now common knowledge.

Atmospheric CO2 levels has been steadily increasing, and according to Scripps CO2 data is at an all time high of just over 396.8 ppm as of the latest available data from February. Starting March 1958, the Scripps Mauna Loa data is the longest-runing, high-precision instrument record for atmospheric CO2. But you can check their data yourself..
Monthly data
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
Annual data
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/tren...nnmean_mlo.txt


So your 'range' is bullshit, like the majority of your blather. The increase is even more than I previously posted, and hardly virtually constant.

~~~

Not that anyone is reading or doing the research, but in reading the preface to both charts your referenced above, one can observe the manipulation of raw data that is uploaded to agencies around the world six different versions in one month, all with different predictions.

The first assumption, by presentintg NOAA data, is that the agency with without an agenda, is wrong. It is a government agency with a political agenda, like every other government agency.

******

"« Another Scary IPCC Climate Change Bomb Defused - Scientists Say Greenhouse Gas Fear Overblown | Main | The Embarrassing & Total Collapse of The IPCC's Antarctica Alarmist "Science" »


"Science" By Lubchenco's NOAA: Fake Global Warming By Changing Historical Temperature Data


To promote the global warming scare, Jane Lubchenco's NOAA continuously changes past temperature records to create fake warming - on a monthly basis

When one starts working with temperature data from various climate research agencies, one begins to notice rather bizarre style of science that would likely qualify as fraud in the mind of a normal person. "

Your source information is faulty, thus your conclusion are in error and, once again, you are wrong.

amicus

*****

Edited to add:

CO2 Science



. Mission Statement
________________________________________
The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change was created to disseminate factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content. It meets this objective through weekly online publication of its CO2 Science magazine, which contains editorials on topics of current concern and mini-reviews of recently published peer-reviewed scientific journal articles, books, and other educational materials….

As noted by Wofsy (2001), however, the rate of CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere over the past two decades "has stayed the same or even declined slightly,"…

Additionally, one must question the emphasis on CO2, at an average of 380 ppm over the past centuries, is the least of the the so called 'greenhouse gases' in the atomosphere.

You might also ask why such individuals and groups are pushing the faulty science of global warming when there is no such thing that is caused by man?

What is there to gain by promoting false information? Control is what they want, to control the activities of man and direct those activities in an acceptable manner for the communal left concept of existence.

Maniind is not to be controlled and directed by these wet lipped deviant intellectuals, mankind, you and I, are to be free to driect our own lives to our own happiness. Not some asinine Marxist goal that no rational person wants any part of.

amicus veritas

[phrodeau]

Originally Posted by amicus

~~~

Not that anyone is reading or doing the research, but in reading the preface to both charts your referenced above, one can observe the manipulation of raw data that is uploaded to agencies around the world six different versions in one month, all with different predictions.

The first assumption, by presentintg NOAA data, is that the agency with without an agenda, is wrong. It is a government agency with a political agenda, like every other government agency.

******

"« Another Scary IPCC Climate Change Bomb Defused - Scientists Say Greenhouse Gas Fear Overblown | Main | The Embarrassing & Total Collapse of The IPCC's Antarctica Alarmist "Science" »


"Science" By Lubchenco's NOAA: Fake Global Warming By Changing Historical Temperature Data


To promote the global warming scare, Jane Lubchenco's NOAA continuously changes past temperature records to create fake warming - on a monthly basis

When one starts working with temperature data from various climate research agencies, one begins to notice rather bizarre style of science that would likely qualify as fraud in the mind of a normal person. "

Your source information is faulty, thus your conclusion are in error and, once again, you are wrong.

amicus

You should hook up with Trysail. He also loves a catchy essay title.

[amicus]

Originally Posted by phrodeau

You should hook up with Trysail. He also loves a catchy essay title.

~~~

Trysail is not fond of me, but he does excellent work and sources all his statements and conclusions.

thanks...

ami

[amicus]

To the public at large, the global warming hoax is a dead issue, as it should be.

But, as you can see, from the response to this Thread, the rabid zealots of the Left want to keep the issue alive as if it had importance.

The tragedy is that behind the scenes, government agencies, such as the EPA, are working furiously to impose ever increasing limitations on business and industry in a misguided attempt to control emissions of so called green house gases.

Further, the governemtn continues to fund, with your money, grants to universities and "think tanks' to add more false information to the accumulation of inaccurate data.

Time and energy expended on discussing this dead issue might be better used to combat the destructive efforts of those who are prosyletizing anti family, anti child bearing agendas to school children of all ages.

To imagine a sizeable part of an entire generation deciding not to raise a traditional family becuse of some faulty information and an agenda that is anti human is a crime against humanity. Imagine the lives ruined and the futures destroyed when young people turn away from the only path in life that can bring them happiness and fullfilment.

If you need any specific reason to hate and detest the left wing ideology, this is it, an inhuman, anti human agenda to destroy the future of an entrie generation.

And you question why I write against the Left as I do?

amicus

[mercury14]

Originally Posted by amicus

~~~

Trysail is not fond of me, but he does excellent work and sources all his statements and conclusions.

thanks...

ami

Trysail's primary source for global warming analysis is a British accounting major with no education or training in climatology. Just thought you'd want to know.

[amicus]

Originally Posted by mercury14

Trysail's primary source for global warming analysis is a British accounting major with no education or training in climatology. Just thought you'd want to know.

~~~

Trysail has dozens of primary sources and hundreds of others, which, if you had ever read him you would know.

But, then, you are the phony through and through and just want to attempt to discredit a source of reason in the global warming hoax you assholes love.

You are about as useless as a person could be, and nasty too, your dentures bothering you? Hemmhoroids acting up? Your asshole ain't designed to act as a vagina, dummy.

amicus

[JackLuis]

[mercury14]

Originally Posted by amicus

~~~

Trysail has dozens of primary sources and hundreds of others, which, if you had ever read him you would know.

But, then, you are the phony through and through and just want to attempt to discredit a source of reason in the global warming hoax you assholes love.

You are about as useless as a person could be, and nasty too, your dentures bothering you? Hemmhoroids acting up? Your asshole ain't designed to act as a vagina, dummy.

amicus

Aside from the accountant, he also swore that a drama major was a good climatology source. I'm not so sure he's right.

Why are you and Vette so interested in my asshole?

[Sean Renaud]

Someone should probably inform Ami that there is no such thing as a traditional family and that there is no particularly good reason to have children.

[amicus]

Originally Posted by Sean Renaud

Someone should probably inform Ami that there is no such thing as a traditional family and that there is no particularly good reason to have children.

~~~

For those with no past and no future, you have a small point.

Let me attempt to educate you, just a little, too much might kill you. Traditional, aka, natural, is where a woman chooses a man to impregnate her based on his ability to provide for and protect her and her child.

If the society is isolated and there are too many males, then the woman accepts the support of several. If, on the other hand, too many females, each is shared; gut these are exceptions and do not break the rule. Are you still with me or shall I repeat that for you, slowly?

Secondly, there is a very good reason to have children; children are, by definition, the only path to human happiness.

Nowl..you do have to have some small understanding of nature and nature's imperatives to understand, so I will spell it out for you.

The first is that life will struggle to survive in any environment.

Second, behind survival of the individual, is survival of the species, i.e., reproduction. Beginning to see the light?

Exrtrapolate then, that the purpose of life is to reproduce, that and nothing more, save the strong survive, the weak do not. (you lose)

That being self evident and axiomatic, then fulfillment of that imperative to reproduce, is the definition of human satisfaction, e.g. happiness.

And that, you dimwitted statist is the reason to have children.

There is more, but you will have to pay.

amicus

[KingOrfeo]

Originally Posted by amicus

To the public at large, the global warming hoax is a dead issue, as it should be.

Most Americans Favor Action on Climate Change

Dec 13, 2012 03:00 AM ET

A large majority of Americans now say global warming should be a priority for the president and Congress.

A large majority of Americans now say global warming should be a priority for the president and Congress, according to a new report by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. The report is based on a national survey conducted in early September – well before hurricane Sandy provided even more persuasive evidence that climate is changing and sea levels are rising.

General public concerns about climate change have been growing over the past few years and generally corresponds to a rise in attention the matter is getting in the media, said Anthony Leiserowitz, the director of the Yale project. That, in turn, has a lot to do with what kind of weather is making the news, he said.

"In 2011 there were 14 weather events that cost more than $1 billion," said Leiserowitz. "They were staggering. Many Americans were beginning to connect the dots themselves."

According to the Yale report, 88 percent of Americans say the U.S. should make an effort to reduce global warming, even if it has economic costs. Of that majority, 44 percent percent favor a medium-scale effort, even if it has moderate economic costs and 24 percent (one in four) support a large-scale effort even if there are large economic costs. About one in five (19 percent) support a small-scale effort, even if it has small economic costs.

These numbers are much higher than a few years ago, said Leiserowitz, because not only were fewer weather events making the news, but the economic recession pushed climate change out of the headlines and. therefore, out of many peoples' minds.

[vetteman]

Originally Posted by KingOrfeo

Most Americans Favor Action on Climate Change

No they don't.

[phrodeau]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/08/world/...nge/index.html

(CNN) -- Global warming has propelled Earth's climate from one of its coldest decades since the last ice age to one of its hottest -- in just one century.

A heat spike like this has never happened before, at least not in the last 11,300 years, said climatologist Shaun Marcott, who worked on a new study on global temperatures going back that far.

"If any period in time had a sustained temperature change similar to what we have today, we would have certainly seen that in our record," he said. It is a good indicator of just how fast man-made climate change has progressed. A century is a very short period of time for such a spike.

The Earth was very cold at the turn of the 20th century. The decade from 1900 to 1909 was colder than 95% of the last 11,300 years, the study found.
Fast forward to the turn of the 21st century, and the opposite occurs. Between 2000 and 2009, it was hotter than about 75% of the last 11,300 years.

If not for man-made influences, the Earth would be in a very cold phase right now and getting even colder, according the joint study by Oregon State University and Harvard University. Marcott was the lead author of the report on its results.

To boot, the range of temperatures from cold to hot produced since the industrial revolution began are about the same as the 11,000 years before it, said Candace Major from the National Science Foundation, "but this change has happened a lot more quickly."

[miles]

Originally Posted by phrodeau

I stopped eating Froot Loops in the third grade.

You became one.