If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Discover)   Think climate change is real? Then you're a murderer, tyrant, and a madman   (blogs.discovermagazine.com) divider line 526
    More: Fail, Heartland Institute, climate change denial, Attribution of recent climate change, Poe  
•       •       •

3567 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 May 2012 at 4:16 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



526 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-04 02:24:20 PM
Aw jeez, that's a whole lot of stupid.
 
2012-05-04 02:28:31 PM
You know who else dehumanized his rivals...
 
2012-05-04 02:35:40 PM
That's stupid! I'm not a tyrant.

...yet.
 
2012-05-04 02:47:49 PM
oh for farksake
 
2012-05-04 02:50:47 PM
I was just talking about this with my secret police. They are thinking that we should stop sending people to burn for thought crimes against the the supreme leader and our government. We're switching to bullets now to try and stay more carbon neutral.
 
2012-05-04 03:17:52 PM
Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is dumped into the atmosphere by humans to the tune of 30 billion tons per year, 100 times the amount from volcanoes

Ah, these are the numbers I was looking for. I remember that was something brought up in another thread and my google-fu wasn't up to the task of finding info on it.
 
2012-05-04 03:18:50 PM
Hm. I wonder if Heartland has any Fark trolls on payroll?
 
2012-05-04 03:25:12 PM
Sweet, who have I killed and who am I actively oppressing? Because I really don't feel like I am, and there are some people I'd like to oppress. How does one go about acquiring people to oppress? I'll settle for running a FEMA camp.
 
2012-05-04 03:37:58 PM

abb3w: Hm. I wonder if Heartland has any Fark trolls on payroll?


There's plenty of idiots that'll do that work for free.
 
2012-05-04 03:47:36 PM

GAT_00: I'll settle for running a FEMA camp.


Do you have your brown shirt and jackboots yet? The Obama campaign is giving them out for free right now.
 
2012-05-04 04:05:47 PM
what is this i don't even
 
2012-05-04 04:11:35 PM

abb3w: Hm. I wonder if Heartland has any Fark trolls on payroll?


The locals have claimed (and repeatedly defended) that the goal of climate scientists is to end Western civilization and send us back to a hunter-gatherer society. Not far from the Heartland Institute's latest marketing blunder. It's about the level of self-delusion you need to imagine a worldwide conspiracy of tens of thousands of scientists.
 
2012-05-04 04:17:18 PM
All three at once? I was working on perfecting "tyrant" before moving on, but oh well...
 
2012-05-04 04:19:41 PM
Michelle Bachmann may be guided by the spirit of a serial killer, but I really don't give two shiats what they think.
 
2012-05-04 04:20:19 PM
This should be fun, considering the evangelicals are going green. Gotta protect God's creation and all.
 
2012-05-04 04:23:30 PM
I thought I was a hapless dupe, sucked in by the Orwellian mind control spewed by our Washington overlords.

Oh well. This sounds more fun, anyway.
 
2012-05-04 04:24:05 PM
Thank god for billboards. I wouldn't know what to drink.
 
2012-05-04 04:24:27 PM
Can we start talking about the Heartland Institute in the same context as the Westboro Baptist Church now?
 
2012-05-04 04:25:59 PM
Two words.

Agenda 21.
 
2012-05-04 04:28:14 PM
To be fair, it is one of the more moderate positions I've heard from a conservative group lately.
 
2012-05-04 04:28:19 PM
Is the right trying to lose this election on purpose? I mean, lose it really, really badly? Or are they really this consistantly stupid? The only voice of sanity I hear from the right wing these days is Karl Farking Rove! The fact that Karl Rove is the sane one telling his side to cut out the crap already is, well, insane by itself.
 
2012-05-04 04:29:16 PM

Geotpf: Is the right trying to lose this election on purpose? I mean, lose it really, really badly? Or are they really this consistantly stupid? The only voice of sanity I hear from the right wing these days is Karl Farking Rove! The fact that Karl Rove is the sane one telling his side to cut out the crap already is, well, insane by itself.


I know. We're well and truly through the rabbit hole.
 
2012-05-04 04:29:21 PM
I read just the other day that Rachel Carson's the biggest mass-murderer since Hitler!

Who really buys this crap anymore? Maybe when their trailer gets blown into the next congressional district by a January tornado outbreak, they'll get the message.
 
2012-05-04 04:30:25 PM
It appears Heartland has realized that when you argue against reality frantic rhetoric your only real replacement for evidence.
 
2012-05-04 04:33:26 PM
well.. the got 1 out of 3...
 
2012-05-04 04:33:26 PM

GreenAdder: You know who else dehumanized his rivals...


However, he believed in Christian creationism.

/Yes, Ben Stein is a bald-faced liar.
 
2012-05-04 04:35:07 PM
I laughed. A group of people at the Heartland (and in the heartland) consider this a brilliant argument and will challenge you to defend yourself against their unassailable logic.

Just imagine them high-fiving each other and excitedly telling friends and colleagues about their new ad campaign. That right there is some funny stuff.
 
2012-05-04 04:35:20 PM
Guess what they are losing this fight just like gay marriage. On NPR science Friday today a Yale study was discussed which shows 78% of Americans and 52% of Republicans believe and are concerned about global warming. Link
 
2012-05-04 04:36:10 PM
Wait, Bin Laden?

These people put up a billboard saying that Bin Laden, who is dead, still believes in global warming?

I guess the conspiracy theory is that Obama faked the Bin Laden raid, and he is still hiding in a cave, furiously believing in global warming.
 
2012-05-04 04:36:59 PM

redpanda2: Can we start talking about the Heartland Institute in the same context as the Westboro Baptist Church now?


I'd argue they're considerably more harmful. Westboro Baptist Church doesn't get defended on major media networks, let alone be given airtime.

blog.heartland.org
 
2012-05-04 04:37:09 PM
I've seen crazier billboards then that driving up I-65 to Chicago.

My favorite so far has been:

Anti-Choice sign:
"Many women regret their decision to have an abortion..." [dead baby picture]

***half-mile down the road***

Pro-Choice sign:
" ....Most women don't." [happy woman picture]
 
2012-05-04 04:37:12 PM
I reckon they just want to let the motherfarker burn....
 
2012-05-04 04:37:56 PM

abb3w: Hm. I wonder if Heartland has any Fark trolls on payroll?


Unpossible!
 
2012-05-04 04:38:04 PM

redpanda2: Can we start talking about the Heartland Institute in the same context as the Westboro Baptist Church now?


With a lot of obvious "how can you NOT say this" sentiment and a sprinkle of subconsciously conflicted rightwing mumbling? I can guarantee it. Fark GUARANTEES IT.
 
2012-05-04 04:38:48 PM
Dumb asses. It's already been established that the climate is changing. The particular pinch points are:
Is the accelerated rate normal and what's the cause?
 
2012-05-04 04:39:10 PM

gameshowhost: what is this i don't even


It's tit for tat.

The more crude global warming evangelicals have called people murderers, monsters, and idiots for daring to drive a large car and eating cow meat.
Now their opponents call them anti-humanist tyrants for wanting to curb mankind's ambitions (ambitions which have somehow become associated with burning excessive amounts of gasoline).

The result?

Butthurt.
Buthurt, all across the internet!
 
2012-05-04 04:41:37 PM

Geotpf: Is the right trying to lose this election on purpose? I mean, lose it really, really badly? Or are they really this consistantly stupid? The only voice of sanity I hear from the right wing these days is Karl Farking Rove! The fact that Karl Rove is the sane one telling his side to cut out the crap already is, well, insane by itself.


The right is embracing the complete abandonment of rationality that infects their politics now. Karl Rove looks sane by comparison, because Rove's technique still requires an unintentional reference to reality (i.e. figure out whatever reality is and then intentionally say the opposite). You can guide yourself to rationality through Rove's philosophy because the compass is always exactly 180 degrees off.

But this is the new Wild West of bullshiat. Bullshiat has no connection to reality. No roads lead from bullshiat to the truth. It's just a black hole of DERP with reality beyond the event horizon. Bullshiat has no memory and no rules, and that's what has Rove scared. Because you can't control a headless beast.
 
2012-05-04 04:43:00 PM

smeegle: Dumb asses. It's already been established that the climate is changing. The particular pinch points are: Is the accelerated rate normal and what's the cause?


Why, I'm glad you asked. There happens to be quite a large number of primary scientific studies on this topic, and people have looked at them in aggregate.

From the journal Science:
"The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.

Admittedly, authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point.

This analysis shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect."
 
2012-05-04 04:43:21 PM

Geotpf: Is the right trying to lose this election on purpose? I mean, lose it really, really badly? Or are they really this consistantly stupid? The only voice of sanity I hear from the right wing these days is Karl Farking Rove! The fact that Karl Rove is the sane one telling his side to cut out the crap already is, well, insane by itself.


"voice of sanity" and "Karl Rove" in the same sentence? I avoid seeing/hearing/reading anything about Karl Rove, as he makes me want to vomit. If HE is passing for sane now...well, now that I think about it, he's never been *crazy*, just really, really, really, really, really, really evil. I will still avoid him at all costs.
 
2012-05-04 04:50:50 PM
Doesn't seem much different than the accuations against 'deniers'.

Im struck with a strong feeling of meh.
 
2012-05-04 04:50:54 PM

chimp_ninja: smeegle: Dumb asses. It's already been established that the climate is changing. The particular pinch points are: Is the accelerated rate normal and what's the cause?

Why, I'm glad you asked. There happens to be quite a large number of primary scientific studies on this topic, and people have looked at them in aggregate.

From the journal Science:
"The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.

Admittedly, authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point.

This analysis shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect."


Reid Bryson is Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography and of Environmental Studies. Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research, The Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies (Founding Director), the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Many climatologists regard him as the father of climatology. Professor Bryson calls manmade global warming absurd.
 
2012-05-04 04:51:13 PM

chimp_ninja: redpanda2: Can we start talking about the Heartland Institute in the same context as the Westboro Baptist Church now?

I'd argue they're considerably more harmful. Westboro Baptist Church doesn't get defended on major media networks, let alone be given airtime.

[blog.heartland.org image 640x406]


Why the hell do these guys always look like this? Seriously, it's getting boring.



Haigh! Ahmma Flat-top Douchebag!

www.thehotjoints.com

*click*

commentariesonthetimes.files.wordpress.com

hrhhhhhhhghMYFLATOP'S UNDERNEATH

كان يظن انتم على اللات والعزى
ومنوة، الثالثة، والآخر؟
هذه هي واحدة تعالى، الذي يؤمل شفاعة ل.
 
2012-05-04 04:51:54 PM
FACTS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY
/Morbo
 
2012-05-04 04:52:02 PM

chuckufarlie: chimp_ninja: smeegle: Dumb asses. It's already been established that the climate is changing. The particular pinch points are: Is the accelerated rate normal and what's the cause?

Why, I'm glad you asked. There happens to be quite a large number of primary scientific studies on this topic, and people have looked at them in aggregate.

From the journal Science:
"The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.

Admittedly, authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point.

This analysis shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect."

Reid Bryson is Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography and of Environmental Studies. Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research, The Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies (Founding Director), the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Many climatologists regard him as the father of climatology. Professor Bryson calls manmade global warming absurd.


928 contemporary papers vs. 1 professor emeritus...hmm.
 
2012-05-04 04:52:06 PM

smeegle: Is the accelerated rate normal and what's the cause?


I suppose this should be left about....
 
2012-05-04 04:52:14 PM
Let's see... before he developed his interest in lovingly handcrafted explosives, the Unabomber had a PhD in math, a NSF fellowship, and a teaching job at Berkeley. The climate-change deniers have... which of those? Yeah, I'm gonna have to go with Ted.
 
2012-05-04 04:53:43 PM

pdee: Doesn't seem much different than the accuations against 'deniers'.

Im struck with a strong feeling of meh.


I believe the "feeling of meh" is the particular accusation being levied at "deniers."
 
2012-05-04 04:54:49 PM

God Is My Co-Pirate: FACTS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY
/Morbo


Is Morbo your navigator?
 
2012-05-04 04:55:09 PM
Ya know what, Phil Plait can go fark himself.

After years of Plait calling people deniers and equating them to holocaust deniers, Plait can just jam this entire billboard right up his ass.
 
2012-05-04 04:56:37 PM

qorkfiend: 928 contemporary papers vs. 1 professor emeritus...hmm.


One professor emeritis post-mortem. Reid Bryson died a few years ago.
 
Displayed 50 of 526 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report