Limbaugh claims that no evidence supports global warming, then says anybody suppressing such data was "doing us a favor"
November 30, 2009 1:27 pm ET
From the November 30 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
There's no sin that's worse, IMHO.
On the other hand I find it sort of amusing that you use "qu@@R" and "pack some fudge" to show how tolerant you are. ;) Just an observation and no offense intended.
PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL DATA?
22.8 million dollars to Phil Jones, who know how much to the other GW fearmongers.
Re-distribution of wealth... proof...
That data can be re-gathered from those same weather stations - the stations themselves are the repository of that data.
This is a ridiculous allegation. When people open up a reference book, then take notes about data and information gathered in that reference book, then use those notes to write a paper, they don't save all the notes. They put footnotes in the paper to document their sources. Then, if someone wants to check their work, they'd go back to the original source.
What the climate change people kept were the numbers they would use for future research too - not the original source data, but the corrected data from those sources, and that all happened 3 decades ago. Go back and check out the original source data, if you want to. The climate change people aren't responsible for that data - the original sources - the weather monitoring stations - would be responsible for their data.
Then lets not regulate coal burning!
Lets not restrict automobiles from how much emissions gets put out!
We should not have regulated CFC output.
We should just pollute our A$$es off!
*Facepalm*
You keep asking the same question: "PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL DATA"
I gave you links. Then you claimed it was "manipulated", without proving your claim that the data at
You are applying "Argument By Question"
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#question
One more time - Here are some sites with data. Prove it's manipulated.
http://www.ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/by_new/bysubjec.html
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/climatedata.html
And explain how so many scientists were conned into accepting bogus data. Just how does that work?
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
http://climate.nasa.gov/
http://coaps.fsu.edu/climate_center/climatechange.shtml
http://www.ucsusa.org/ssi/climate-change/scientific-consensus-on.html
Here's another definition for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
Thanks professor.
That's the Voice of Conservatism.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Do these fools ever even listen to themselves?!
You suppressing your mouth will do us a favor!
I can suppress a lie, the truth, an opinion, or evidence but I can not suppress something that does not exist. So if the evidence does not exist then it is cannot be suppressed. This shows that you are no where near as intelligent as you think you are. (Thank God for that.) You are nothing but an idiot pretending to be a geniuse and it shows to any reasonning person who hears what you say or reads what you write.