7 thoughts on “NASA takes to Facebook to shut down climate change deniers in the most brutal way”

  1. When the hell did Bill Nye – who is neither trained as a scientist nor practiced as a scientific investigator – become an “American scientist” of any standing whatsoever with regard to allegedly anthropogenic global climate change?

    And Obozo’s Muslim outreach agency – the National Aeronayttics and Space Administration, may peace be upon them – is going “to set the record straight” when they themselves have so gaudily screwed with the record in order to sell the economy-hammering “Clean Power Plan” of our Indonesian-in-Chief?

    Whee! In the sense that Orwell’s novel *1984* was a “satire,” ain’t this ever-so-satirical?

  2. I am pleased to report the London GeoEthics Conference, 8-9 Sept 2016 is back on track!

    https://geoethic.com/london-conference-2016/

    The London Conference may be the modern re-enactment of the classic battle of life in each of us. Good vs Evil and/or Truth vs Untruth, as described in ancient religious teachings, e.g., the great battle at Kurukshetra in the Bhagavad Gita.

    The divisive and seemingly endless AGW debate may be conclusively concluded in London on 8-9 September 2016.

  3. Tucci78, your comment was right on, … of course there is some global warming, nonetheless man is a miniscule (if you will), part of the problem.

  4. R.S. Helms: “…of course there is some global warming, nonetheless man is a miniscule (if you will), part of the problem.”

    Undoubtedly, purposeful human action affects local and even regional climate. It’s impossible to look upon large-scale agriculture – not to mention the more massive hydraulic engineering works, such as draining swamps, dredging harbors and estuaries, building dikes, levees, canals, dams and their impoundments – without considering their climate effects. What I’ve been wondering ever since the premise about combustion-derived atmospheric carbon dioxide’s incremental greenhouse gas effect was first brought to my attention 35 years ago is the extent to which hard evidence supports the contentions that said effect is actually mensurable, that such mensuration represents a statistically significant reflection of physical reality, and that any such added greenhouse gas effect on the global climate is genuinely and provably adverse to any human being anywhere on the planet.

    I’ve been paying more or less close attention to this “anthropogenic global warming” conjecture since 1981 and I confess I haven’t seen anything from the allegedly credentialed alarm-crying climatologists more solidly rooted than Birnam Wood come to Dunsinane.

  5. So, has NASA changed the settings in their climate models to take away the cooling by aerosols?? I doubt it as that was the excuse for why we were not already experiencing another degree or so of warming!! Taking away that cooling would make the models diverge even further from reality if they don’t have another kludge to make up for it!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.