I was going to do a April Fools Day post like liberalism is great and I’ve been wrong all along… but I came across this fool so why create a fool when we’re surrounded by them? So first things first the climate always changes it’s called seasons – the global warming alarmist changed the term to ‘climate change’ when the earths temperature actually started going down, they just change the language to fit the events on the ground. It’s a typical libtard re-write and now if you don’t believe in climate change you must be a climate racist that needs treatment…
Comparing skepticism of man-made global warming to racist beliefs, an Oregon-based professor of sociology and environmental studies has labeled doubts about anthropogenic climate change a “sickness” for which individuals need to be “treated”.
Professor Kari Norgaard, who is currently appearing at the ‘Planet Under Pressure’ conference in London, has presented a paperin which she argues that “cultural resistance” to accepting the premise that humans are responsible for climate change “must be recognized and treated” as an aberrant sociological behavior.
Norgaard equates skepticism of climate change alarmists – whose data is continually proven to be politicized, agenda driven and downright inaccurate – with racism, noting that overcoming such viewpoints poses a similar challenge “to racism or slavery in the U.S. South.”
Normally, I don’t like to comment on peoples appearance or physical attributes – you gain nothing from it and undermine your own argument and with that said this chick seriously she looks like a ‘tard and years and years of riding the short bus can do that to you, so stay off the short bus, Wilber.
Liberals will grasp at every straw to prove their case for whatever their cause of the moment might be. The will twist, bend, manipulate and skew the data to fix their agenda and to hell with the facts. Doing this is not all that difficult – give me a large research grant and I too can reach a conclusion that perfectly matched my own ideology or if they feels they are getting nowhere fast with their conclusions then your failure to understand must mean you are mentality challenged. There is no possible way they could ever be wrong so then clearly in their eyes your the ‘tard.
However one side calling the other side mentally challenged is nothing new – go search up “conservative mental disorder” or “liberal mental disorder” and get a cornucopia of results supporting either side… and since I’m a Libertarian I thought is only fair to search up “libertarian mental disorder” and low and behold Harvard has done a study saying that people of a Libertarian mindset and believe in free market capitalism with limited government must have a mental disorder. They do this to comfort their own fears and support their own ideologies.
This is why I never waste my time on these pissing contest between your belief is a mental disorder… no, yours is… no, yours is… frankly I think the need to argue which is a the bigger ‘tard is a mental disorder in itself. So be that as it may…
Now while I will admit that I accuse liberals of being mentality unstable, unfit, limited, defiant, impaired and/or generally childlike in their beliefs of a Utopian world on a semi-regular basis. What I am is more apt to insist that they prove their case when they opt to make some wild ass claims and then try quickly moving on… I call this drive-by bullshit. For people like Norgaard who will say the polar ice caps are melting, baby seal are dying, the globe is warming or we’re destroying the planet – I’ll say prove it libtard? Tell me what caused the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago? You can’t blame carbon fuels, you can’t blame man, so what is it? Was it Clovis man driving his SUV across the Bering Land Bridge in search of the mighty mastodon? Somehow I doubt it.
So I ask what caused the last ice age to end? And the one before that and the one before that and the one before that… etc? Unless you think just maybe their is a greater long term cycle to the earths climates that predates man but is just a mere second or two in the geological and climatic timeline? Yeah, I’ll go with that.
See I… being of somewhat sound mind and body… albeit a little out of shape right now believe liberals look at a very narrow window of data and draw long term conclusions from that small sample. Anyone that has ever worked with SPC (thank you W. Edwards Deming) know’s how foolish if not down right stupid this can be – you just can’t take a small sample (last 100 years) from the data pool (the whole history of earths climate) and establish a mode (variation of change) and then predict a mean (define the average) with such a very limited sample size, you’ll never establish a pattern because it’s statistically improbable.
You can research “mean mode median range” if you really want to understand it more fully.
Let me say it an easier why for those that are interested…
Based on the recorded history of earths weather of roughly the last 100 years out of 6 billion to predict a long term trend would be like taking one thimble full of water from one location on earth and then claim that based on that one sample all the water on the earth is either cooling or warming. So based on the age of the earth and assuming that the earth has had some form of weather it would be absolutely asinine to take the last 100 years and try to predict out the next 100 or 500 or 1000 and try to establish a pattern… and anyone that does that is probably mentally ill.
Let me ask you one simple question for those that believe in global warming… when was the last time the weather report was right?
So Ms Norgaard the village called … your missed they want you back.