Setting up the Global Warming lies to come

[Magox]

Some Democrats are not afraid to defend cap and trade

 

http://www.nytimes.c...an.html?hp&_r=0

 

A winning issue for some

 

Have you ever seen a human pretzel before? Ask Udall if he supports the Keystone pipeline and watch him morph into one.

 

Also, gotta love the Ny Times.

 

And in 2013, Terry McAuliffe, then the Democratic nominee for governor in Virginia, ran television ads attacking his Republican opponent for denying the existence of climate change. Mr. McAuliffe won.

 

As if this issue took him to the top. Maybe it had to do with him outraising him almost 5 to 1 or that Cuccinelli was viewed as too far to the right for Virginia, or maybe it had to do with the Lt Gov who is a complete loon.

[OCinBuffalo]

I live in British Columbia. In 2008, the province instituted a carbon tax with a corresponding cut in income taxes. This made the tax "revenue neutral" so the governments total tax take remained the same. Although there was a transfer of wealth among citizens as people who were more depended automobile use (rural residents) paid slightly more tax, where as urban dwellers who used less gasoline and had some alternative transit options available earned some tax savings.

 

Generally the Carbon Tax appears to be a success. It's estimated that B.C's GHG emissions have been reduced by 19% per capita, but the provinces GDP has kept pace with the rest of Canada.

 

I don't believe taking action to reduce GHG emissions will be that costly economically. And if we are concerned that the human generated climate could render parts of the planet uninhabitable 100 years from now that it seems like taking action to reduce GHGs makes sense, if the economic costs are small. That being said, given global industrial growth its hard to imagine that reducing of GHG's in Canada and U.S. would do much to slow the pace carbon emissions.

Or....

 

We could properly look at this as precisely what it is: behavior conditioning on a grand scale.

 

One of the stated objectives of environtologists is to force people to live in cities, and to stop the "deadly" suburban sprawl. All this does? Sooner or later BC residents are going to move to cities...where they can be further controlled by the left.

 

And that leads us to the real, cynical, objective here: if they force more people to the cities, individual liberty, individual rights, and individual ways of life....can be pushed aside in favor of what is best for the collective. You can easily make cases like: "more people are living in this city now, so, we need more government employees(and more votes)" and "well, you need to understand that we have to raise your property taxes, because we have to hire these new people.

 

The very worst thing that has happened to the left in the last 50 years has been de-poputation of cities. They win most of their elections in cities 90/10, but they win far fewer of them overall, and far more of them have become untenable. This is why winning our House, in a "standard election year" is now a pipe dream for the left. Period.

 

It doesn't matter which country you live in: decentralization, in all cases and applications, is the enemy of the left.

Some Democrats are not afraid to defend cap and trade

 

http://www.nytimes.c...an.html?hp&_r=0

 

A winning issue for some

There's been a Taranto link(B-Man) in this thread, so, in the spirit of his posts, and in celebration of you providing a perfect Fox Butterfield moment:

 

"Fox Butterfield, Is That You?" http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323482504578227664228137272

 

When literally everything is a losing issue = health care, foreign policy, governance, economy....then something like cap and trade, in comparison, yes, becomes a "winning" issue.

 

The math:

Your going to whipped badly on the other issues

+

so few people care about Global Warming

=

You "win" that issue, because the only people that care about it are the far-left nuts who are going to vote D no matter what. When they do the exit polls...I predict you'll have "won" the Global Warming "battle"! Hooray! You'll also have won the "alien abduction is real", and "vaccines cause autism" issues, because those are the same people.

 

Hint: you can win with 20% of the electorate in CO. What do you do about the other 80%, with whom you are losing on the issues they care about?

 

With Udall polling at 45(at best ?/43 and 41? Ouch!) , as a sitting Senator in CO? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/co/colorado_senate_gardner_vs_udall-3845.html Bye Bye Buddy. An incumbent, with name recognition in a swing state...polling at only 45 against a guy whose only been in Congress for 2 terms?

 

Not good at all for Udall. Of course, as always, I'm not saying who will win/2 term Congressman guy might turn out to "be a witch". I'm saying: the #s don't look good. CO has an environtologist base, sure, and he's probably hoping to turn them out. But, CO also has a signficant no-nonsense/no-ideology/practical demographic...which is why Udall is at 45.

 

Only a clown sees any of this as "winning".

[Gary M]

http://news.yahoo.co...-140245612.html

 

A sure sign of things to come.

 

Edited June 12, 2014 by Gary M

[B-Man]

Climate 'McCarthyism Claims Yet Another Victim

 

Original Article

 

Climate McCarthyism has claimed another victim. Dr Caleb Rossiter--an adjunct professor at American University, Washington DC--has been fired by a progressive think tank after publicly expressing doubt about man-made global warming. Rossiter, a former Democratic congressional candidate, has impeccably liberal credentials. But none of this was enough to spare him the wrath of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) when he wrote an OpEd in the Wall Street Journal describing man-made global warming as an "unproved science." Two days later, he was sacked by email. The IPS said: "We would like to inform you that we are terminating your position

 

 

 

 

.

[Gary M]

remember this science is settled!!!!!

[Oxrock]

"A new study by researchers at the University of Texas, Austin found that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is collapsing due to geothermal heat, not man-made global warming.

Researchers from the UTA’s Institute for Geophysics found that the Thwaites Glacier in western Antarctica is being eroded by the ocean as well as geothermal heat from magma and subaerial volcanoes. Thwaites is considered a key glacier for understanding future sea level rise."

There is a link to a pdf of the study. It wouldn't load for me, but I'm on a very old windows XP machine.

 

Read more: http://dailycaller.c.../#ixzz34XC3BSJk

Edited June 13, 2014 by Oxrock

[Nanker]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10916086/The-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html

 

"When I first began examining the global-warming scare, I found nothing more puzzling than the way officially approved scientists kept on being shown to have finagled their data, as in that ludicrous “hockey stick” graph, pretending to prove that the world had suddenly become much hotter than at any time in 1,000 years. Any theory needing to rely so consistently on fudging the evidence, I concluded, must be looked on not as science at all, but as simply

a rather alarming case study in the aberrations of group psychology

." Christopher Booker

[4merper4mer]

http://www.telegraph...rming-data.html

 

"When I first began examining the global-warming scare, I found nothing more puzzling than the way officially approved scientists kept on being shown to have finagled their data, as in that ludicrous “hockey stick” graph, pretending to prove that the world had suddenly become much hotter than at any time in 1,000 years. Any theory needing to rely so consistently on fudging the evidence, I concluded, must be looked on not as science at all, but as simply

a rather alarming case study in the aberrations of group psychology

." Christopher Booker

 

 

 

Like the old song says:

 

....There it is.

[B-Man]

Supreme Court limits EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases...

 

 

 

 

Australian PM introduces bill to repeal carbon tax...

 

 

 

The fable of the burning river, 45 years later.

 

It supported the Earth Day narrative, so we got the fable instead of the history. Because journalism.

 

 

 

.

Edited June 23, 2014 by B-Man

[B-Man]

Act Locally, Wish Globally: Proposed carbon-emission cuts would hobble the U.S. economy but do nothing for global levels.

 

By Kevin D. Williamson

 

 

The Environmental Protection Agency has won a victory at the Supreme Court, with a solid majority of the justices, including Antonin Scalia and John Roberts, signing off on its regulation of greenhouse gases emitted by power plants and other entities already subject to its permitting process. In a separate ruling, the Court forbade the EPA from extending its scope to entities not currently under its jurisdiction based solely on expected greenhouse-gas emissions. President Barack Obama’s plan to issue a presidential fiat requiring that states reduce their greenhouse-gas emissions by 30 percent will not affected by the rulings. Justice Scalia warned the EPA not to get ahead of itself: “Our decision should not be taken as an endorsement of all aspects of EPA’s current approach,” he wrote, “nor as a free rein for any future regulatory application” of the so-called Best Available Control Technology (BACT) rules. Instead, “our narrow holding is that nothing in the statute categorically prohibits EPA” from implementing its contemplated greenhouse-gas controls.

 

So, a limited victory, but a victory nonetheless on the fundamental matter of using the Clean Air Act — a piece of legislation intended to fight air pollution in the form of ground-level ozone, sulfur, lead, particulate matter, and the like — to empower the agency to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases on the theory that doing so will help prevent or reduce global warming, an issue that is separate from the questions of smog and industrial toxins that the Clean Air Act was written to address.

 

{snip}

 

What we have here is, then, yet another exercise in magical thinking from our regulators. As with his case for raising tax rates on the wealthy even if doing so would have no effect on revenue, President Obama remains concerned about policy inputs rather than policy outcomes, believing that this is the right thing to do regardless of whether it has any effect on global warming — which it almost certainly will not. If we really believe the EPA administrator’s rhetoric — that we have a “moral obligation” to prevent global warming — then we should be asking ourselves some very difficult questions: How big of a permanent reduction in the U.S. standard of living are we prepared to accept? Mexico levels? Uganda levels? How many poor people in Asia and Africa, rounded to the nearest 10 million, are we willing to see starve to death in this crusade? (Agriculture and the transportation, processing, and refrigeration of food are significant sources of greenhouse-gas emissions.) If we are not willing to contemplate those questions, then we must ask another: What national economic price are we willing to pay for cuts that are negligible from the relevant global point of view, cuts that will have no meaningful effect on anything except the self-satisfaction of those who see global warming as a moral question rather than a scientific and economic question?

 

The president and the EPA need to reread their Kant: Ought implies can.

 

 

Bearing in mind that the global metric is the only relevant one, can the U.S. executive branch, acting unilaterally, with negligible support and considerable opposition from the people’s elected representatives in Congress, achieve a meaningful reduction in global greenhouse-gas emissions? Almost certainly not, because there is no politically plausible program under which the United States will enact emissions cuts that are significant on the global scale. Our own people would not support the necessary reduction in our standard of living, and the rest of the world will not forgo economic growth and development. The Supreme Court may very well be correct that there is nothing in the statute that prevents the EPA from proceeding on its chosen course, but a decent regard for reality counsels strongly against it.

 

If the president wants to make a hollow symbolic gesture, he should choose a less expensive one: Jimmy Carter’s dopey sweater speech was a bargain by comparison.

[OCinBuffalo]

If the president wants to make a hollow symbolic gesture, he should choose a less expensive one: Jimmy Carter’s dopey sweater speech was a bargain by comparison.

It is just a matter of time until the word "dopey" become permanently associated with Global Warming.

 

How else can you describe a...well, we can't call it a theory anymore, can we? How else can we define this...position?...which is STILL based on 2 speculations?

 

For those of you who can't be bothered to read the OP, Global Warming, the "settled science," has been in a status of 100% dependency on 2 speculations for 9 months to the day. The speculations:

1. Global Warming Pollution is both preventing and causing Global Warming, at the same time.

2. Global Warming is hiding at the bottome of the ocean.

 

Nothing, NOTHING, has been delivered since that proves either of these speculations to be true. AND, if neither of these speculations prove out, then the entire Global Warming Position(specifically the notion that man is causing a catastrophic climate FAIL), falls apart.

 

It falls apart specifically because the observations of temperature have NOT met the predictions specified by the models. It hasn't even been close.

 

PERIOD. It's the 9 month aniversary of this thread. The baby is here , and we STILL don't have any evidence for either speculation, nor do we have any new save ass speculations that can come make the bad man stop.

 

Birdog, Baskin, gatorturd....it's been at least 6 months for you. Where is the evidence for either speculation?

 

Tell us: what's going to be different 9 months from now, besides more "adventurers"** getting stuck in polar ice?

 

**(Adventurer: what the leftist media calls Global Warming Scientists, who get stuck in ice, that "isn't supposed to be there". )

 

I wonder if 97% of "adventurers" agree? The League of Very Ordinary Gentlemen?

Edited June 25, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[B-Man]

Scientists, researchers and climate experts whose views are often ignored by the media will gather to share their views at the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change in Las Vegas, Nev., from July 7-9. The conference is being put on by The Heartland Institute.

 

This conference will bring together climate scientists from around the world, some from as far away as Australia, Sweden, Germany and Russia to challenge the widespread claims about man-made global warming.

 

The Heartland Institute is a leading proponent of skepticism over climate change, publishing three editions of “Climate Change Reconsidered.” They call it a collection of peer-reviewed scientific studies about global warming that provides an “independent ‘second opinion,’” on the issue.

 

 

 

Read more: http://newsbusters.o...a#ixzz35fKxPox7

[DC Tom]

Scientists, researchers and climate experts whose views are often ignored by the media will gather to share their views at the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change in Las Vegas, Nev., from July 7-9. The conference is being put on by The Heartland Institute.

 

This conference will bring together climate scientists from around the world, some from as far away as Australia, Sweden, Germany and Russia to challenge the widespread claims about man-made global warming.

 

The Heartland Institute is a leading proponent of skepticism over climate change, publishing three editions of “Climate Change Reconsidered.” They call it a collection of peer-reviewed scientific studies about global warming that provides an “independent ‘second opinion,’” on the issue.

 

 

 

Read more: http://newsbusters.o...a#ixzz35fKxPox7

 

bull ****. They're no more independent than the IPCC.

[keepthefaith]

Forces of nature caused the Earth to come out of the ice age a looonnnggg time ago. Those forces then stopped and our climate was to maintain itself for eternity with no variation. Then man came along and started burning things which is now causing change. Had man not done this, there would be no change in the climate.

 

Is this what we are supposed to believe is true?

[OCinBuffalo]

Forces of nature caused the Earth to come out of the ice age a looonnnggg time ago. Those forces then stopped and our climate was to maintain itself for eternity with no variation. Then man came along and started burning things which is now causing change. Had man not done this, there would be no change in the climate.

 

Is this what we are supposed to believe is true?

Hey, 9 month aniversary. I'd say that calls for me to head out to the bar tonight.

 

Actually, it calls for me to head out to a very specific bar, with a very specific, presidential/founding of the country-oriented name, and harass the F out of Wawrow, Sullivan and the rest of Buffalo News losers, Celino, Barnes, and especially the sorry assed "old guy who prints out Global Warming stuff, and brings it to the bar every night, hoping I show up so he can give me homework", and especially the dopey owner who hasn't beaten me with one of his history/geography questions for the entire time I've been in this town.

 

Yeah. 9 month aniversary of this thread pretty much says I should merely do what I do to them once per month = open the door and pull a Hancock = "Global Warming? You're all idiots!"

bull ****. They're no more independent than the IPCC.

Happy Aniversary Baby....

 

...I live rent-free in Tom's miiiiiinnnnnd!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2Dna8dffc4&feature=kp

 

Look, I'm wasted, and this song from my 4 year-old days just popped out. It's not you, so much as you're just the post I had left over when I multiquoted....and I forgot WTF I was gonna say! Probably isn't better anyway. And why not throw this your way? Hell you got the Sharona thing.

 

Yeah...it's time to stop posting now. Big wins today == Tonight == "Where's wawrow?" == I will probably end up expounding...

 

on why "convention vs. configuration is a sucker's comparison, and is a weak-ass derviation of impedence mismatch, formulated by IT clowns in San Francisco who aren't even fit to do QA on my project"

 

...to crackheads.

 

But, it's a catchy tune, had to get it in, right?

 

Happy Aniversary Baby, got the Lies on my miiiinnnnd!

 

Sing it! (Come on, it's been a good day! Sing bitches!)

Edited June 26, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[DC Tom]

 

...I live rent-free in Tom's miiiiiinnnnnd!

 

 

Many voices do.

[OCinBuffalo]

Joey Bag a Doughnuts Baby!

 

Got Rocky on his miiiinnnnd!

 

 

 

And so it goes.

 

Where would we be, as a nation, without short Italian guys? No. Seriously?

 

Many voices do.

Well then, it's only fair I ID the voice here.

 

I am responible == the one who says "sweating pipe is old school, learn PVC, unless your trade package is as big as your intellect package!

 

Or some such Blue Collar Hero douchebaggery.

 

 

That's the best part: it willl tak them years to figure it out.

 

EDIT: well, of coure if they were to acquore EII's decoder ring ? All bets are off.

Edited June 26, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[DC Tom]

 

I am responible == the one who says "sweating pipe is old school, learn PVC, unless your trade package is as big as your intellect package!

 

 

I'm all about old school. I'm so damn old school, I wear a fedora while I sweat pipe.

[Tiberius]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/06/23/may-climate-report/11260723/

 

 

Last month was the warmest May for the Earth on record, according to a climate report released Monday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The heat was fueled by unusual warmth in the oceans, which make up more than 70% of the Earth's surface.

"The majority of the world experienced warmer-than-average monthly temperatures, with record warmth across eastern Kazakhstan, parts of Indonesia and central and northwestern Australia," the report from NOAA's National Climatic Data Center noted. "Scattered sections across every major ocean basin were also record warm."

The combined average temperature over the entire globe in May 2014 was 59.93 degrees Fahrenheit, which was 1.33 degrees above the 20th-century average, NOAA said.

[Nanker]

[B-Man]

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - has released data showing that US temps have not risen in the last decade and have, in fact, dropped.

 

From Forbes:

Responding to widespread criticism that its temperature station readings were corrupted by poor siting issues and suspect adjustments,

NOAA established a network

of 114 pristinely sited temperature stations spread out fairly uniformly throughout the United States. Because the network, known as the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), is so uniformly and pristinely situated, the temperature data require no adjustments to provide an accurate nationwide temperature record. USCRN began compiling temperature data in January 2005. Now, nearly a decade later, NOAA has finally made the USCRN temperature readings available.

According to the USCRN temperature readings, U.S. temperatures are not rising at all – at least not since the network became operational 10 years ago. Instead,

the United States has cooled

by approximately 0.4 degrees Celsius, which is more than half of the claimed global warming of the twentieth century.

 

The decline in the US matches what we know about the temperature stagnation occurring all over the planet for the last 17 years:

Second, for those who may point out U.S. temperatures do not equate to global temperatures, the USCRN data are entirely consistent with – and indeed lend additional evidentiary support for – the

global warming stagnation of the past 17-plus years

. While objective temperature data show there has been no global warming since sometime last century, the USCRN data confirm this ongoing stagnation in the United States, also.

 

Third, the USCRN data debunk claims that rising U.S. temperatures caused wildfires, droughts, or other extreme weather events during the past year. The objective data show

droughts, wildfires

, and

other extreme weather events

have become less frequent and severe in recent decades as our planet modestly warms. But even ignoring such objective data, it is difficult to claim global warming is causing recent U.S. droughts and wildfires when U.S. temperatures are a full 0.4 degrees Celsius colder than they were in 2005.

Even more importantly than the facts above, the USCRN provides the promise of reliable nationwide temperature data for years to come. No longer will global warming alarmists be able to hide behind thinly veiled excuses to doctor the U.S. temperature record. Now, thanks to the USCRN, the data are what the data are.

 

It should go without saying that this data will change no one's mind or deter the administration from trying to implement their CO2 policies anyway. They ignore inconvenient facts and spout their hysteria anyway. In that sense, it doesn't matter what the science is. Politics is driving this debate now and the goal will be to marginalize skeptics with ridicule and name calling.

 

 

 

.

[Koko78]

That NOAA data isn't worth crap. The extra heat the planet is accumulating is being hidden where the "scientists" are not looking.

 

NOAA is just staffed with a bunch of lying climate change deniers.

[Tiberius]

Where is the link to the Forbes article?

[DC Tom]

Where is the link to the Forbes article?

 

Did you check Forbes?

[B-Man]

My mistake.

 

http://www.forbes.co...e-long-cooling/

 

The link to the N.O.A.A. info is in the original post

[Tiberius]

 

 

Did you check Forbes?

 

 

Did you check Forbes?

No. You are suppose to provide a link to stuff you post.

 

My mistake.

 

http://www.forbes.co...e-long-cooling/

 

The link to the N.O.A.A. info is in the original post

Total BS article. He doesn't even deny global warming just nibbles at the edges to make the "alarmist" look unreliable. He doesn't link to the actual study but links to another Forbes talking Conservative head who argues that, what he claims happened just in the last 12 months shows GW is no big deal. Its just nonsensical, but what do you expect?

[....lybob]

Since Global Warming is claptrap I fully expect republicans to take on the insurance industry http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-linden-insurance-climate-change-20140617-story.html and the U.S. navy http://greenfleet.dodlive.mil/files/2014/02/USN-Arctic-Roadmap-2014.pdf no sense having the people pay for fake science.

[Tiberius]

Since Global Warming is claptrap I fully expect republicans to take on the insurance industry http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-linden-insurance-climate-change-20140617-story.html and the U.S. navy http://greenfleet.dodlive.mil/files/2014/02/USN-Arctic-Roadmap-2014.pdf no sense having the people pay for fake science.

Oh, the Tin Foil hats will say insurance people are just after higher premiums and Navy wants more funding.

[....lybob]

Oh, the Tin Foil hats will say insurance people are just after higher premiums and Navy wants more funding.

There are very few real tin hats in congress, most are well paid skeptics with a good dose of "Après moi, le déluge"

[DC Tom]

Since Global Warming is claptrap I fully expect republicans to take on the insurance industry http://www.latimes.c...0617-story.html

 

That is some of the most alarmist claptrap I've read in a long time. Miami's already turning in to Venice?

[Tiberius]

 

 

That is some of the most alarmist claptrap I've read in a long time. Miami's already turning in to Venice?

 

So it's not in the process of turning that way? When does that process begin?

 

 

 

A" Miami skateboarder is propelled by the winds from hurricane Wilma in 2005. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters

Clear skies above but water below, a woman on a moped navigates a flooded street corner on Miami Beach, an all-too-familiar sign for residents of this iconic peninsula where the ocean seems more likely than ever to swamp Ocean Drive one day.

 

If there's an image that starkly illustrates the threats of climate change, it's this photograph, which was included in the recent National Climate Assessment released by the White House. It is noteworthy because the flood is from exceptionally high spring tides – not heavy rains. Tidal flooding like that is relatively new. And scary. "People in Miami Beach are living climate change," said David Nolan, a meteorology and physical oceanography professor at the University of Miami. "They're on the frontline.""

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/17/climate-change-global-warming-miami-floods-hurricanes

[DC Tom]

So it's not in the process of turning that way? When does that process begin?

 

 

 

A" Miami skateboarder is propelled by the winds from hurricane Wilma in 2005. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters

Clear skies above but water below, a woman on a moped navigates a flooded street corner on Miami Beach, an all-too-familiar sign for residents of this iconic peninsula where the ocean seems more likely than ever to swamp Ocean Drive one day.

 

If there's an image that starkly illustrates the threats of climate change, it's this photograph, which was included in the recent National Climate Assessment released by the White House. It is noteworthy because the flood is from exceptionally high spring tides – not heavy rains. Tidal flooding like that is relatively new. And scary. "People in Miami Beach are living climate change," said David Nolan, a meteorology and physical oceanography professor at the University of Miami. "They're on the frontline.""

 

http://www.theguardi...oods-hurricanes

 

Ah, yes. The Skateboards of Venice.

[B-Man]

Ah, yes. The Skateboards of Venice.

 

Band Name ! I call it.

 

 

.

[Tiberius]

 

 

Ah, yes. The Skateboards of Venice.

You don't deny man made global warming, you just attack those that want to do something about it

[3rdnlng]

You don't deny man made global warming, you just attack those that want to do something about it

 

Seriously, what are your proposals for doing something about global warming?

[Koko78]

Seriously, what are your proposals for doing something about global warming?

 

This sounds like a job for a hashtag!

[....lybob]

This about the mentality I'd expect from the climate warming is a hoax crowd http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/07/rolling-coal-conservatives-screw-obama-by-modifying-trucks-to-spew-toxic-black-smoke/

[DC Tom]

You don't deny man made global warming, you just attack those that want to do something about it

 

No, I attack those that say stupidly alarmist **** and call it "science."

[truth on hold]

Physicist Offers $30,000 Reward To Anyone Who Can Disprove Climate Change

 

“I have heard global warming skeptics make all sorts of statements about how the science doesn’t support claims of man-made climate change,” Keating announced on his blog. “I have found all of those statements to be empty and without any kind of supporting evidence. I have, in turn, stated that it is not possible for the skeptics to prove their claims. And, I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.”

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/07/02/physicist-offers-30000-reward-to-anyone-who-can-disprove-climate-change/

[Deranged Rhino]

Seriously, what are your proposals for doing something about global warming?

This sounds like a job for a hashtag!

:lol: