====
Billy –
>>Everything comes from NASA.<<
Name one thing.
NASA is not even the leading or largest climate research facility in the US.
According to a 2012 study, these are the Top 10 most overall influential climate research institutions. NOAA is a much bigger player than NASA – and it only ranks 9th.
1. Harvard University (USA),
2. Princeton University (USA),
3. Stanford University (USA),
4. University of East Anglia (UK),
5. University of Cambridge (UK),
6. Competitive Enterprise Institute (USA),
7. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA),
8. World Wide Fund For Nature (USA),
9. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (USA),
10. York University (Canada).
http://sme.bit.edu.cn/docs/2012072410085...
=======
Billy,
Now, now; I never said East Anglia was "worthless." I have a friend there and really like the place. I was responding to your claim that they produced most climate scientists. My comment was about the size of the place.
Secondly; I never said they were the 4th or whatever best and neither does the above list which is someone else's ranking of the most "influential" (not "best") institutions.
No one requires NASA's blessing. NASA does not have Pope-like power - or influence. In fact. NASA has no power over anyone who does not work at NASA.
Here is some information on NASA funding opportunities. NASA is a long way from having Vatican-type money.
https://research.usc.edu/files/2011/05/G...
http://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/soli...
Kano is quite interesting, he claims to agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that it is responsible for the earth retaining more heat. At the same time he has insinuating an impending Ice Age, claimed that CO2 is good for plants and that the likely effect of a doubling of CO2 is negligible. He is running the whole gamut of denier claims and it might be useful to point him to skeptical science dot com rather then debunk each and every one of his claims multiple times here on yahoo answers. After a month or two he seems to get that he is wrong and moves on to the next claim. In a few years he might even accept most of the science that the climate scientist agree on.
Sagebrush is a denier because he believes his god is responsible for everything and anything He even suggested that any one that does not agree with his distorted view of the world should be executed. Now I guess that he probably got angry because atheist (and fellow Christians) in the R&S section giving him a hard time about his extremist views. He even tries to use the atheist answers, ridiculing the gods, on scientist. In short he is an angry and deluded old man and I have never met any one yet, who I consider more evil.
It's all no more than distraction. i am new to answering but have followed the forum. I got so frustrated reading that crap I decided to try to call them on it. Kano, Ian, Maxx, Cyclops, Billy, Sagebrush, et all Mike, Michael, Jerry It is all bunk They keep saying there is no warming and Sage and ?? shared a link to Phil Jones who actually said it was warming although not a significant amount. Dum, Da, Dum, Dum, DUM Warming is warming no mater how slight and the oceans are absorbing more and more heat effecting sea rise which they don't believe either. It's like talking to brick wall (a poorly built brick wall at that) because they wont read anything but bunk and they don't listen and hav zero learning ability
. The poles and Greenland and the permafrost are melting faster each year, warming the ocean and playing a major role in extreme storm activity. The lame follow the pied pipers of denial and don't even realize they get farther from the truth and reality of AGW to the point they have nothing to offer. So they follow the professional denier arguments but anyone who will follow the deniersd here are definitely dumber than a box of rocks
I find it funny that you believe .004% of a GHG is terrible and requires desperate action. I understand that .004% GHG is the strongest per say. However you see zero significants that through multitudes of technology and ionospheric heaters we are adding more ionized particles to the Ionosphere which directly effects the troposphere. Is the ionized particles being added very minimal? Yes. But don't you think that is also unnecessary pollution?
This is why I focus on conspiracy or have been led down this road. Science is always contradicting itself. Why? Because your all nothing more then copy paste/download info from NASA. Everyone is listening to NASA. NASA is a bunch of lying nazi's(literally research Operation Paperclip) and have ZERO interest in telling us any truth. All your doing is repeating NASA which deliberately through it's very system of spreading knowledge works for the governments of the world and only gives you knowledge which suits the Agenda.
Who polices NASA? no one they are the one and only. Everything comes from NASA. It then just trickles down from there. Yet you think it takes "too many" people for a conspiracy when all this information comes from one source........open your mind.
Not a scientific institute or scientists in general is going to challenge NASA. When they do history shows they are condemned and ridiculed by the masses of NASA repeaters.
On the flip side same thing with BIG OIL AND ENERGY. Trust me when I say I hate the lies they spew on all sorts of matters MORE then anyone else here. They are all equally worthless in my eyes. So we do see eye to eye in some phases.
IN THE WORLD OF SCIENTIFIC RELIGION NASA IS THE POPE. ZERO DIFFERENCE THEY ARE THE SAME THING. ALL TOP 10 RESEARCH CENTERS FOLLOW THE LAWS OF NASA AND THEIR MASTERS AT THE UK ROYAL SOCIETY. IF YOU CHALLENGE THESE PEOPLE'S AND ORGANIZATIONS OPINIONS YOUR RIDICULED AND CONDEMNED.
Gary F- I remember when I exposed East Anglia and you told me they were worthless and not even a top 10 research center in their country(UK) yet now there the 4th best research center in the world? Again contradictions. NASA is the Pope and you must get the Pope's blessing. What is scary is this is the only religion they do not have a dalai lama per say. It appears more logo education maybe needed. NASA number 1 the other top 10 is the "trickle down" I say above. You never use the lords name in vein hence why NASA is not on the list.
good heavens, that was a long and incoherent rant.
Are there no depths of stupidity to which the h*ell bent religion of alarmist denial of the century of science documenting anthropogenic climate change will not plunge?
Kano's latest nonsensical anti-science fake question:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20140301170351AALH2y1
"Is climate change a failure?"
(Kano blocks me because I expose his endless anti-science copy-paste deceptions. I block him because he floods the category with them, and I draw the line where I can: on my questions. Is this some kind of equivalent infraction against the "free and open debate" in this "forum"? Please read the F-ing guidelines of this site, finally, folks, and cease coddling the anti-science liars by indulging in such delusions).
What KANO of course MIGHT MEAN -were he a serious seeker of ANSWERS to questions rather than an ideologue on an anti-science crusade- is, "Is climate change POLICY a failure?", but in his pigheaded denialist ignorance, he cannot see that science ≠ politics or policy.
Okay, admittedly, he is less dumb than some deniers, and more polite than most. So are many other crackpot espousers of colossally misinformed conspiracy theories with hugely damaging long term implications for the long term future of the global economy.
But see the writing on the wall, finally, people:
SCIENCE = POLITICS
is THE BIG LIE
which the Village Genius True Scientist #7 Best Answerer in the category here, were he not trying lamely to emulate Goebbels himself, might cite as a prime example.
And this sort of anti-Answer sabotage is supposed to be the "skepticism" of the "other side" of "debate" in this "forum"???
As that top best answerer denier, who makes Kano look like Albert Einstein in comparison, might put it, a few thousand times or so, with or without a few Goebbels chokes or quotes to the side:
HA HA HA!
