FloyddGondolli

Bad science is bad science. The things you mentioned above have been rejected because...well...it was sh!tty science. This global warming topic is a very complicated issue and there is evidence to support a side. The unfortunate issue is the involvement of politics in something that really should not have an agenda.

It's still garbage science since there is evidence that data was manipulated to further an agenda. Science may be neutral or fact, Scienctist are men/women and have their biases.

We are witnessing bad science since it has been politicized and there is a clear agenda. If the Nazis win, the myth of their science would be taught as that, science. Hindsight is 20/20 and we can say these things now looking back 60 years later.

We live in a propanganda world and in that vortex of Climate Change talk and the conference in Durban, SA at the moment. People are referred to Climate Deniers akin to a Holocaust one and the difference is the side that is pushing this agenda is acting as if the debate is over. Carbon tax credits and offsets galore. It's a non starter and irresponsible of government or anyone to act if this is settled within the community.

Much like the Nazis found Scientist to prove that the Aryan was superior to all and other groups were scientifically inferior and or the how Scientist spoke of the world being flat and those who questioned either group or any science were punished.

Politics has entered this debate and they have created a deritivates markets in the form of carbon offsets and carbon taxes much like the Catholic Church had a scheme to pay off your sins several hundred years ago. Funny how the Warmers resort to name calling or churlish straw man. Scientist have an agenda and or are useful idiots in this scheme. There are other scientist who in fear of being blacklisted don't chime in. There are vocal scientist on the other side as well. I haven't formed an opinion on this matter because I'm still waiting for the Global Cooling to come that was predicted in the 1970's. I also notice the rebranding of the issue to say "I told you so" from Global Warming to Climate Change whatever happens. AT This point, I just see people seeing a way to make money and create a new revenue stream and more market intervention by governments and the UN. Firms like Goldman Sachs has alot of energy contracts based on higher energy prices in the future and a way to get there is cause or false/inconclusive science. Green Energy, check your PSEG bill to see what "Societal Benefit" costs along with higher rates you are already paying for S recs credits and group think social engineering.

Long live Grock radio.

An economy needs two things for it's "middle class" to thrive: Low food and Low energy costs, forget taxes. Food prices have been climbing so fast since 9/11 as have fuel prices. Any canidate that acknowledges and addresses these issues has a good chance of winning.


Look at how many people take food stamps on every level and WIC and other programs. I know why social safety exists, but someone has to be paying for these. This president right or wrong can be blamed for expanding them. These programs are Herion or Lays potato chips once you start, you can't stop.

Pure hunch really.

I do think he is most likely gone, but I am just less certain than I was before.

Your hunch is a bit more optimistic than my hunch.