Motifake
politics
epic fail
military funny
stupid human
ufo
MAD
politifake

Latest comments




PREV PAGE

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 7:07pm, #72995

In other words, Cook is just some knucklehead liberal throwing his hat in the ring when he shouldn't.But he himself admits he's a non-climate scientist. He's not part of the consensus.He doesn't represent NASA nor the scientific community. Cheers

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:52pm, #72994

Whatever Cook's flaws are (and personally, i think it is clear he was just trying to cash in on this by trying to arrive at the same conclusions, but with c'rappy methods) he is thankfully independent of the sci-community http://climate.nasa.gov/blog/938

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:44pm, #72993

But, NASA, unlike Cook, is a much better source for consensus scientists, and it is their data which forms that authority...not Cook, not Hulme, not any one opinion. http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:32pm, #72992

Cook suggests an "invitation" system (lol) which introduces bias into any objective study and violates the foundations of what a consensus should be...and essentially goes against the bedrock of science itself.

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:30pm, #72991

As for conspiracy theorist John Cook, he's unqualified in this field and his advocacy is disguised as science, arguing against experts in the field...which is ridiculous.

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:22pm, #72990

P.S. You also dodged the indictment of "your source" which revealed the heavy weight scientist in your article (Mike Hulme)is an evangelical Christian who thinks the world is 6000 years old.Those are the "scientists" who got your back. Good luck with that

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:20pm, #72989

...demonstrating that the theory is widely accepted - and relied upon. Hence why it is considered a consensus and why you keep relying on conspiracy theory. Sorry...but I don't think the Iluminati are behind it.Stop confusing populism with academia.Cheers

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:18pm, #72988

...and when one scientist builds on the work of another, he acknowledges the work of others through citations. The work that forms the foundation of climate change science is cited with great frequency by many other scientists...

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:17pm, #72987

Scientists change their minds on the basis of the evidence, and a consensus emerges over time. Not only do scientists stop arguing, they also start relying on each other's work. All science depends on that which precedes it...

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:16pm, #72986

The consensus in science is different from a political one. There is no vote. Scientists just give up arguing because the sheer weight of consistent evidence is too compelling, the tide too strong to swim against any longer.

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:16pm, #72985

As far as the rest of the planet goes, maybe the debate rages on. But the scientific consensus is the current authority among scientists...

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:15pm, #72984

The problem OTC, is you are deliberately confusing a political consensus with a scientific one. The science community has already made up it's mind about this. Who cares what the handful of crackpots think?The same folks who believe in a flatearth,bigfoot

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:12pm, #72983

I know..."Calron"(lol) already tried that. Read the top of the article by Taylor which says "OPINION". It's an OP-ED, not a scientific journal. It's not authoritative. What's next? A picture of your kitchen sink? X-D

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 6:10pm, #72982

You're projecting OTC. Virtually no scientist on the planet agrees with you. And you alleging a conspiracy theory when you suggest a hoax. Childish. In the field of climate science, the consensus is unequivocal:human activities are causing climate change.

OTC - Feb 19, 2015 6:08pm, #72981

Keep drinking the 97% Cool-aid http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/05/30/global-warming-alarmists-caught-doctoring-97-percent-consensus-claims/

OTC - Feb 19, 2015 6:05pm, #72980

You missed the point about the 97% Do a little research on John Cook from Queensland University and stop confusing GW with MMGW. I agree there has been GW, I just disagree with your source for its reason

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 4:18pm, #72979

Here, a better source for you OTC, more up your alley ;-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbBX6aEzEz8 Cheers =)

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 4:17pm, #72978

..awahahahahahahaha!!!! *sigh* *wipes tears* And to make matters funnier, OTC, like you,Hulme doesn't understand the meaning of consensus (i.e. it's not a popularity contest).Hence why his work is ignored by ALL his peers and has no authority in his field

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 4:14pm, #72977

Really? *ahem* The main scientist in this article you quoted Mike Hulme is a self-proclaimed evangelical Christian...He's also been ostracized by his peers. Yeah, a man who believes literally in a Jesus hoax is your source about an alleged GW hoax? bwhaha

OTC - Feb 19, 2015 3:51pm, #72976

http://www.populartechnology.net/2014/12/97-articles-refuting-97-consensus.html?m=1

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 1:10pm, #72975

Then again, you were the same person who said "Nixon isn't a conservative folks..."[#70726] Um, surrrrrre... And Clinton really didn't have s'ex "with that woman." X-D Funny. I will consider the source on this one,Freasy. ;-)

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 1:06pm, #72974

"In the field of climate science, the consensus is unequivocal:human activities are causing climate change."If there is a conspiracy,which is the only way to account for"BS"then the burden is on u to prove it.Otherwise BS is the only word you were correct

freasy - Feb 19, 2015 12:40pm, #72973

Man Made Global Warming is BS, Climate Change on the other hand as the name has been changed to protect the guilty has always occurred. With or without man.

fauxnews - Feb 19, 2015 1:11am, #72972

We still live in the dark ages. We are just better at bull****ting ourselves about it than they were

Zeitguy - Feb 18, 2015 11:43pm, #72971

Carnations or Lillys? My dearest condolences. But really, why do modern intellectual human beings have to pander to this middle age bull****?

fauxnews - Feb 18, 2015 11:31pm, #72970

A request? Sure... If I get beheaded, send flowers to my fam. ;-)

Zeitguy - Feb 18, 2015 10:53pm, #72969

Dare ya to make an Islam prophet p******** poster.

fauxnews - Feb 18, 2015 10:36pm, #72968

Yes Master Po.

Zeitguy - Feb 18, 2015 10:33pm, #72967

My hope for humanity rests on you, grasshopper.

fauxnews - Feb 18, 2015 10:00pm, #72966

Okay...lol...point taken. ;-) haha... While on the subject, of the force, of the farce? I think the dork side already has its dibs on me. ;-p Not sure I will ever escape that X-D Cheers :-)

Zeitguy - Feb 18, 2015 9:56pm, #72965

Ok fine, so your point is best displayed by emulating all that you despise. No need to go to the dark side my friend.

fauxnews - Feb 18, 2015 9:32pm, #72964

...so, what I'm saying is,"if the shoe fits?" But if it makes you feel better: I don't plan to do anymore of the LONG form ones[ie. The point of the poster IS the poster - in its form.]Thanx for taking the time to read it,in any case.Excedrin?lol Cheers=)

fauxnews - Feb 18, 2015 9:28pm, #72963

P.S. Whether I was successful in my 'attempt' is up to my audience. But sometimes the medium is the message. The long list of lies by Foxnews is, ironically, "dreadfully tired"and"extremely revealing in lack of thoughtful discourse" And "blind pundentcy."

fauxnews - Feb 18, 2015 9:25pm, #72962

Oh, love you too Zeit. *smootch* :-*

Zeitguy - Feb 18, 2015 9:15pm, #72961

Regardless Faux, your attempt to reincarnate past banned blogger format is not only dreadfully tired but also extremely revealing in lack of thoughtful discourse. You don't have to dismiss the opposing view based on blind political pundentcy.

fauxnews - Feb 18, 2015 8:31am, #72960

Every time? Citation?

OTC - Feb 18, 2015 7:21am, #72959

Every time CNN and MSNBC report what Obama says, they are reporting a lie.

PeteofSanJose - Feb 18, 2015 3:18am, #72958

Also Obozo. He'll tell you, it's all Bush's fault.

theyuk - Feb 17, 2015 11:11pm, #72957

Yes, there's a 1L(ooser) out there, but don't let 'em spoil our fun. I'm just glad to see that at least two people got it-it's kinda' esoteric.

Zeitguy - Feb 17, 2015 9:04pm, #72956

Any comparable research paper on CNN and MSNBC. Scientific procedure demands controlled studies. Great effort.

NEXT PAGE


Skip to page

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 590 600 610 620 630 640 650 660 670 680 690 700 710 720 730 740 750 760 770 780 790 800 810 820 830 840 850 860 870 880 890 900 910 920 930 940 950 960 970 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 1040 1050 1060 1070 1080 1090 1100 1110 1120 1130 1140 1150 1160 1170 1180 1190 1200 1210 1220 1230 1240 1250 1260 1270 1280 1290 1300 1310 1320 1330 1340 1350 1360 1370 1380 1390 1400 1410 1420 1430 1440 1450 1460 1470 1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 1540 1550 1560 1570 1580 1590 1600 1610 1620 1630 1640 1650 1660 1670 1680 1690 1700 1710 1720 1730 1740 1750 1760 1770 1780 1790 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990