Ice age coming in 2030

[Wild Cobra]

Zharkova made statement she wasn't qualified to make, and your right-wing hate media blew up into a anti-AGW mini-age starting in 15 years. total rightwing media bull

Yes, it is bull . If the solar cycle continues as predicted, Maunder Minima type conditions are probably 50 years or so away. Not 15.

[TeyshaBlue]

I read up through the guilt by association, the unsubstantiated claim that 'mountains of evidence are being ignored,' the cherry picked stupid thing said by scientist, and the HANSEN/GORE! part but then lost interest for it being the same stupid .

The unsubstantiated claim was lifted from a book linked in the statement. Sounds like it could be valid....guess I'd have to read the book to establish the validity of the statement. That he bothered to link it lends some credence in my mind. Not knowing much about the subject, I found the structure and basis of his statements at least somewhat compelling. I was just wondering why nobdy would weigh in on them.

[TeyshaBlue]

Read about the Guardians's outgoing editor.

Cant be found in the moonbat rss feed.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I don't care who creates the models. If they don't comport with reality, they are . Same goes for this ice age prediction.

And we've discussed this too. BEST is doing a very good job championing the models that do match observations don't you think? EVery GISS/IPCC report on them I have read/seen uses correlation to judge. And taking any uncertainty and presenting it as completely worthless is a hallmark of the people youre shilling for. It's not like you are creative.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The unsubstantiated claim was lifted from a book linked in the statement. Sounds like it could be valid....guess I'd have to read the book to establish the validity of the statement. That he bothered to link it lends some credence in my mind. Not knowing much about the subject, I found the structure and basis of his statements at least somewhat compelling. I was just wondering why nobdy would weigh in on them.

When making a case for important data being skipped, actual examples are incredibly compelling and should be easy to obtain given that hyperbole. Instead we get a generalization when discussing a new discovery, fact, or logic? I know how to lie and mislead as well. That is a good way to do it. He doesn't even have to take personal responsibility for saying it.