Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 8:
Line 8: + +
Talk:Climate agenda (view source)
Revision as of 05:48, February 16, 2014
, 05:48, February 16, 2014no edit summary
::::And what is it that you don't like? And why is Anthony Watts a "fringe source"? Be specific. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 10:52, 15 February 2014 (EST)
::::And what is it that you don't like? And why is Anthony Watts a "fringe source"? Be specific. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 10:52, 15 February 2014 (EST)
:::::Let’s see. The opening paragraph starts with an unreferenced, completely false assertion and mentions evolution even though this is a climate change article. And the article continues along the same lines for several more sentences. I noticed Schlafly is making some of the most flagrant violations of the Conservapedia commandments yet nothing is being done to correct this abuse. Anthony Watts is a meteorologist without any formal education in climate science yet he is used as an authoritative source on climate change by Conservapedia. I call him a fringe source because his conclusions concerning climate change put him within the fringe of academics or pseudo-academics who agree with the 1% of legitimate climate researchers who deny anthropogenic climate change. --[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 23:41, 15 February 2014 (EST)
:::::Let’s see. The opening paragraph starts with an unreferenced, completely false assertion and mentions evolution even though this is a climate change article. And the article continues along the same lines for several more sentences. I noticed Schlafly is making some of the most flagrant violations of the Conservapedia commandments yet nothing is being done to correct this abuse. Anthony Watts is a meteorologist without any formal education in climate science yet he is used as an authoritative source on climate change by Conservapedia. I call him a fringe source because his conclusions concerning climate change put him within the fringe of academics or pseudo-academics who agree with the 1% of legitimate climate researchers who deny anthropogenic climate change. --[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 23:41, 15 February 2014 (EST)
::::::Well, let's see this one. First, climate change or global warming - the "anthropogenic" kind - is a proven fraud, and I could not care less that 99% of "legitimate" climate researchers think the world is coming to an end because someone in New Jersey is running all over town in an SUV; ''consensus'' cannot alter ''facts''. And the fact that it is a fraud is a combination of emails among these "scientists" stating their intentions to deliberately alter the data so they can push a political agenda upon the world in general and the United States in particular; Anthony Watts' posting of images which show that the "scientists" primary source of temperature-taking were machines deliberately placed near sources of man-made heat which ''skewed the data''; and clowns like Al Gore who stated that the North Pole would be ice free ''right now'', when it's not.
:::::::Second, you need to get something straight here, Norman. We're not going to post a liberal agenda on this website. We're not going to change our position on global warming or anything else that the church of liberalism loves; to do so we would have to be complicit in a lie, and we're not going to tolerate it. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:48, 16 February 2014 (EST)