Re: OT: Don't Believe the Hype Al Gore is wrong. There's no"consen...

"Dano" <janeanddano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:25KdnRrqDIv83SzZnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"MZ" <mark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
I'm waiting for the link that asserts that opinions to the contrary arise
from corrupt scientists that fabricate data. Your attempt to change the
subject away from your conspiracy theories and back onto a debate of the
actual subject matter is noted, and probably a wise strategy on your
part.

What's yours?

What's my what? My reference? You see, I don't need one. You made an
assertion and so the burden of proof is on you to prove it. So far, you've
relied on nothing but your word. To be perfectly honest, your credibility
does not stack up to that of an active researcher in the field, so if you're
levying accusations of fraud and corruption towards him (the guy whose MIT
website was linked to earlier) and others who share a contrary view to
yours, then you'd better have some pretty damned good evidence to back it
up. Until then, you're just a delusional nutjob guided by nothing but a
political agenda (the same thing you claim to be railing against).

For someone so insistent that there is evidence to refute the
preponderance of evidence from the overwhelming majority of the scientific
community, you have shown us NOTHING of the sort now have you?

Since I never voiced that opinion, this is nothing but more confusion on
your part. I never stated any opinion whatsoever in this thread about what
I think about global warming. The only opinion I've stated is that you're
an idiot for believing that there's a worldwide conspiracy that all
"dissenters" of the global warming hypothesis engage in, and that
necessarily any attempts to refute their data have been swept under the rug.
This is a conspiracy that only Fox Mulder would believe.

BTW...read the subject line before claiming I have changed the subject.

You really do leftists a disservice because it could give others the
impression that all left-wingers lose their train of thought as readily as
you do. The subject was whether or not scientists on the "other side" of
the issue are receiving payoffs -- an assertion that YOU made. I only
entered the conversation after I read that rubbish. So yes, when we have
that discussion and then you suddenly turn back to what the original thread
was about (a discussion that I didn't engage in), you're changing the
subject. I don't blame you, of course.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Dont Believe the Hype Al Gore is wrong. Theres no"consen...
    ... arise from corrupt scientists that fabricate data. ... you're an idiot for believing that there's a worldwide conspiracy that all ...
    (alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots)
  • Re: Bloody Climate Change
    ... this worldwide conspicy between 1000's of scientists ... of organising such a conspiracy would make it impossible. ... it's not warming up at the moment. ... But I'm not listening to the politicians, ...
    (uk.media.tv.misc)
  • Re: OT manmade global warming "gates"
    ... Turbo... ... you smell really bad ... I want facts, and where required, weighted opinions of trained scientists ... You're alleging a massive conspiracy of scientific data gatherers. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Looks like Josh was right
    ... >>>police scientists Amir didn't fire the third bullet. ... A house relies on the details of each brick ... >> Same for Rabin. ... >> It wasn't a government conspiracy that made that extremist rabbi ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: Commentary: Evolution Theory Is Not Scientific
    ... one group get nearly all the other scientists of every religion or no ... religion to go a long with such a dishonest conspiracy? ...  And when the scientific community rejects it, ... The best example is the UFO devotees who really believe that the United ...
    (talk.origins)