What exactly does this stupid mother fucker want it to be called? Temperature and weather science? When he had his heart attack did he have to go in for "cut people open and repair damaged body scientific procedure?"
He’s a dumb cunt who never graduated high school. He thinks that because he watches the Discovery channel when he’s buzzed on xanz and Bud he’s an authority on the way the world works.
Global Warming and Climate Change were its names before its conclusions and assumptions are more and more politicized. I dont like Anthony either but its dumb to go hard left just because you dont like a guy.
Then why continue to change the name for any other reason than to further push the "republicans are evil white men that deny science" propoganda angle that gets kids rallying. There are questions and uncertainties in the conclusions theyve drawn up about global warming and acting like questioning them in anyway is "denying science" is how they are going about it at this point and its completely dishonest.
The tactics they used are the same the Tobacco companies, lead paint manufacturers and so on used to discredit science that will hurt their investors bottom line. Doubt can be raised on almost anything and people will believe it. Look at flat earthers.
You gotta be pretty ducking daft to think CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas. You gotta be a huge conspiracy nut to deny that global atmospheric carbon isn’t rising.
Then when you think of feedback loops such as the albedo effect, exponentially melting ice by the suns radiation hitting dark colored ground instead of reflecting off now non existent ice. Or how increased temperature result in permafrost melting releasing captured carbon and methane into the air.
It’s pretty fucking asinine to believe it is a hoax.
I dont believe its a hoax, I dont believe having any questions about it equates you to a flat earther, I dont think sciences need to be rebranded every few years, but Im sure both sides make equally stupid comparisons. which is why i just dont care enough to pay attention anymore
Having questions is fine but theres answers to these questions in tens of thousands of studies. The reason they had to rebrand it is because retards thought that global warming was gonna be a good thing for them and make winters warmer, climate change is a much more accurate description and climate science (or climatology) is the science of the climate and has always been called this
He's 100% wrong. The reason things get couched like this is because goddamned retards on the right have politicized fucking science to the point where people need to beat them over the head with how fucking stupid they are.
I thought high school dropout was all about empirically driven scientific research. What aspect of the methodologies are incorrect? Stick to shitting in buckets and making movie references.
Professor Cumia has frequently written to Nature critiquing the statistical analysis techniques in high-impact climate papers. Unfortunately, the liberal editor-in-chief of the publication pays him no mind.
I can’t stand hearing these mouth breathing right wing morons who have no comprehension on how the scientific method works and how there are built in mechanisms to filter out the bullshit, agenda driven, studies and papers. This high school drop out can continue spewing his nonsense but we need to stop giving any credence to these imbeciles.
To be fair, there is literal and actual fraud, deception and propaganda in the scientific community. Proven over and over again. I’m no right-wing lunatic but if you don’t see it, you’re not looking. But back to the main point - yes, Anthony. That’s what it’s called. People who agree or disagree with the theory of man-caused climate change are involved in “climate science.” What the FUCK do you think we should call the sciences that study climate?
As opposed to the rational left Wingers who think Men can become Women who can then become Six Year Olds. Yeah the Right are anti Science.
Also the left that denies that tens of thousands of years have made not only men and women different but different races different. Oh no a man who evolved in a freezing cold environment is totally the same as a woman who evolved in a hot environment.
Also Scientists are some of the biggest money whores out there. If they don't give the results their donors want then they lose their jobs. Really great incentive to be objective isn't it?
Just look at the James Cook lie which is where the 99.7% Stat came from. They didn't even read the papers they sourced and disagreed with about half the actual authors of the papers as to the conclusions of the papers they wrote. Don't get into this delusion that out of all humanity these brave few Scientists are above corruption.
As opposed to the rational left Wingers who think Men can become Women who can then become Six Year Olds. Yeah the Right are anti Science.
If you can legally buy cigarettes which are shitty for you, alcohol which is shitty for you, can get testosterone therapy if you're an older guy and can have shitty side effects (look at Joe Rogan's fucking noggin), get accutane which can really be shitty for you, then what's the problem with letting people buy medical grade testosterone or estrogen hormones from a doctor so they can play dress up? I don't know anything about the scientific research saying if it is possible to innately be transsexual and not just go through a phase, but unless you live in a town with fag parades 24 hours a day every single day of the year, you probably aren't effected in the slightest. And I have no idea what you are talking about with the "become six years old" line. Cherrypicking 1 extremely retarded liberal on twitter who says you can be "transage" isn't the scientific community saying it anymore than 1 extremely retarded right winger who prayed that God would save his dying child from a disease instead of getting medical help representing all republicans.
I have no idea what you are talking about in your second paragaph. Are you saying black and white people are genetically different? Nobody doubts that. Science even backs it. Blacks are way more susceptible to stuff like diabetes or sickle cell. That's science.
Some science is backed by companies, yes. Studies that conclude that High Fructose Corn Syrup isn't that bad is probably funded by the coca cola company or pepsico. Plenty of science is publicly funded or philanthropic through group donations or wealthy surrogates. And there are many legal safeguards and boundaries to prevent a pharmaceutical company from saying they made a sensational miracle drug when it is just snake oil. Regulations aren't 100% foolproof and bad research and science exists but you can't completely abandon science in general because of that. Might as well never eat food from a restaurant ever again because a few restaurants every year somewhere in the country serve lettuce with e coli or whatever.
Dummy. The entire point of the analysis was to look at peer reviewed scientific publications and determine what the range of beliefs was. The finding was that in papers that discussed whether global warming was actually a thing or not, 97.1% of papers posited that it was occurring, and because of human beings.
Among abstracts expressing
a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.
The reason they didn't consider the vast bulk of publications was because they didn't posit a position on the matter.
I was reading through some holocaust denial blogs for the comments under the blog. That's where all the good meat is. The best one was essentially 'this old jew guy is claiming the holocaust happened. but if jews claim to be an honest and righteous people, then why is one lying about the holocaust happening?'.
You've obviously never been involved in research if you think there are infallible filters in place. Once a subject becomes as heavily politicized as climate change, good luck finding unbiased studies.
The tactics they used are the same the Tobacco companies, lead paint manufacturers and so on used to discredit science that will hurt their investors bottom line. Doubt can be raised on almost anything and people will believe it. Look at flat earthers.
You gotta be pretty ducking daft to think CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas. You gotta be a huge conspiracy nut to deny that global atmospheric carbon isn’t rising.
Then when you think of feedback loops such as the albedo effect, exponentially melting ice by the suns radiation hitting dark colored ground instead of reflecting off now non existent ice. Or how increased temperature result in permafrost melting releasing captured carbon and methane into the air.
It’s pretty fucking asinine to believe it is a hoax.
42 comments
1 KillerKuhn 2018-05-12
What exactly does this stupid mother fucker want it to be called? Temperature and weather science? When he had his heart attack did he have to go in for "cut people open and repair damaged body scientific procedure?"
1 RBuddCumia 2018-05-12
He’s a dumb cunt who never graduated high school. He thinks that because he watches the Discovery channel when he’s buzzed on xanz and Bud he’s an authority on the way the world works.
1 late_50s_why 2018-05-12
Hospital smart
1 Yaseetheo 2018-05-12
He's not wrong but that doesn't change the fact that no one cares about his rantings.
1 Compound_MediaPR 2018-05-12
What do you call the science of climate?
1 Yaseetheo 2018-05-12
We call them niggers of color now.
1 sanfrancisco69er 2018-05-12
Global Warming and Climate Change were its names before its conclusions and assumptions are more and more politicized. I dont like Anthony either but its dumb to go hard left just because you dont like a guy.
1 VigoTheCarpethian 2018-05-12
Looking at data and evidence isn’t going hard left
1 sanfrancisco69er 2018-05-12
Then why continue to change the name for any other reason than to further push the "republicans are evil white men that deny science" propoganda angle that gets kids rallying. There are questions and uncertainties in the conclusions theyve drawn up about global warming and acting like questioning them in anyway is "denying science" is how they are going about it at this point and its completely dishonest.
1 VigoTheCarpethian 2018-05-12
The tactics they used are the same the Tobacco companies, lead paint manufacturers and so on used to discredit science that will hurt their investors bottom line. Doubt can be raised on almost anything and people will believe it. Look at flat earthers.
You gotta be pretty ducking daft to think CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas. You gotta be a huge conspiracy nut to deny that global atmospheric carbon isn’t rising.
Then when you think of feedback loops such as the albedo effect, exponentially melting ice by the suns radiation hitting dark colored ground instead of reflecting off now non existent ice. Or how increased temperature result in permafrost melting releasing captured carbon and methane into the air.
It’s pretty fucking asinine to believe it is a hoax.
1 sanfrancisco69er 2018-05-12
I dont believe its a hoax, I dont believe having any questions about it equates you to a flat earther, I dont think sciences need to be rebranded every few years, but Im sure both sides make equally stupid comparisons. which is why i just dont care enough to pay attention anymore
1 VigoTheCarpethian 2018-05-12
Science needs to be rebranded every time new evidence changes prior thought.
1 VigoTheCarpethian 2018-05-12
Oh yes the left is anti science when evidence contradicts their belief system.
1 Motherfrogger 2018-05-12
Having questions is fine but theres answers to these questions in tens of thousands of studies. The reason they had to rebrand it is because retards thought that global warming was gonna be a good thing for them and make winters warmer, climate change is a much more accurate description and climate science (or climatology) is the science of the climate and has always been called this
1 1475315963 2018-05-12
You probably believe your vaccinations are the reason you're so retarded
1 SHITLORD_CUNTDICK 2018-05-12
He's 100% wrong. The reason things get couched like this is because goddamned retards on the right have politicized fucking science to the point where people need to beat them over the head with how fucking stupid they are.
1 Jungies 2018-05-12
Daily Mail reader complains about propaganda lesson he's getting from The Daily Mail, fails to note irony.
1 CONCHOPETEghostcock 2018-05-12
Climate science = climatology you dumb dumb child rapist
1 Single_Action_Army 2018-05-12
That was pretty harsh...
Calling him dumb twice and all...
1 Nulltor 2018-05-12
I thought high school dropout was all about empirically driven scientific research. What aspect of the methodologies are incorrect? Stick to shitting in buckets and making movie references.
1 KingDonaldTrump 2018-05-12
Professor Cumia has frequently written to Nature critiquing the statistical analysis techniques in high-impact climate papers. Unfortunately, the liberal editor-in-chief of the publication pays him no mind.
1 Nulltor 2018-05-12
That would explain the tweet he sent out: 'Libtard cucks didn't adequately control for independent variables. Behave!'
1 bowmanrtr 2018-05-12
He’s so fucking stupid it’s unbearable.
1 chomp-chomp-chump 2018-05-12
You don’t like science talk from a base-head with a 8th grade education?
1 JohnTheGreat78 2018-05-12
They teach about the different fields of Science pre-8th grade.
1 ncervo 2018-05-12
Everyone is "pro science" until it goes against their political views. Why can't this man just be funny like he used to
1 Nulltor 2018-05-12
I herd that alot of scienticians are payed to rite wat they are told to.
1 AiCPearlJam 2018-05-12
"It's become so obvious, you've become so oblivious to yourself"- Wilco singing about Opie, Anthony, and Jimmy.
1 PM_ME_MASTECTOMY 2018-05-12
I can’t stand hearing these mouth breathing right wing morons who have no comprehension on how the scientific method works and how there are built in mechanisms to filter out the bullshit, agenda driven, studies and papers. This high school drop out can continue spewing his nonsense but we need to stop giving any credence to these imbeciles.
1 CommodorePawsey 2018-05-12
To be fair, there is literal and actual fraud, deception and propaganda in the scientific community. Proven over and over again. I’m no right-wing lunatic but if you don’t see it, you’re not looking. But back to the main point - yes, Anthony. That’s what it’s called. People who agree or disagree with the theory of man-caused climate change are involved in “climate science.” What the FUCK do you think we should call the sciences that study climate?
1 Elessar2590 2018-05-12
As opposed to the rational left Wingers who think Men can become Women who can then become Six Year Olds. Yeah the Right are anti Science.
Also the left that denies that tens of thousands of years have made not only men and women different but different races different. Oh no a man who evolved in a freezing cold environment is totally the same as a woman who evolved in a hot environment.
Also Scientists are some of the biggest money whores out there. If they don't give the results their donors want then they lose their jobs. Really great incentive to be objective isn't it?
Just look at the James Cook lie which is where the 99.7% Stat came from. They didn't even read the papers they sourced and disagreed with about half the actual authors of the papers as to the conclusions of the papers they wrote. Don't get into this delusion that out of all humanity these brave few Scientists are above corruption.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/16/where-did-97-percent-global-warming-consensus-figure-come-from/
1 WNEW 2018-05-12
I have a strong feeling you're really into intelligence and race and pesky age of consent laws.
1 chiptheripPER 2018-05-12
'Southeast asian ladyboys are more mature for their age than other racial groups, so there's nothing wrong with my frequent thailand vacations'
1 SoupisOverrated 2018-05-12
If you can legally buy cigarettes which are shitty for you, alcohol which is shitty for you, can get testosterone therapy if you're an older guy and can have shitty side effects (look at Joe Rogan's fucking noggin), get accutane which can really be shitty for you, then what's the problem with letting people buy medical grade testosterone or estrogen hormones from a doctor so they can play dress up? I don't know anything about the scientific research saying if it is possible to innately be transsexual and not just go through a phase, but unless you live in a town with fag parades 24 hours a day every single day of the year, you probably aren't effected in the slightest. And I have no idea what you are talking about with the "become six years old" line. Cherrypicking 1 extremely retarded liberal on twitter who says you can be "transage" isn't the scientific community saying it anymore than 1 extremely retarded right winger who prayed that God would save his dying child from a disease instead of getting medical help representing all republicans.
I have no idea what you are talking about in your second paragaph. Are you saying black and white people are genetically different? Nobody doubts that. Science even backs it. Blacks are way more susceptible to stuff like diabetes or sickle cell. That's science.
Some science is backed by companies, yes. Studies that conclude that High Fructose Corn Syrup isn't that bad is probably funded by the coca cola company or pepsico. Plenty of science is publicly funded or philanthropic through group donations or wealthy surrogates. And there are many legal safeguards and boundaries to prevent a pharmaceutical company from saying they made a sensational miracle drug when it is just snake oil. Regulations aren't 100% foolproof and bad research and science exists but you can't completely abandon science in general because of that. Might as well never eat food from a restaurant ever again because a few restaurants every year somewhere in the country serve lettuce with e coli or whatever.
Yeah the consensus thing is messy but in an observable trend, there are less papers from climate scientists coming out in the last decade that say there is no human impact on climate change even adjusting for a neutral position
Also just for what its worth, climate science is not 100% about man made climate change and nothing else. It's an entire field.
1 Nulltor 2018-05-12
Dummy. The entire point of the analysis was to look at peer reviewed scientific publications and determine what the range of beliefs was. The finding was that in papers that discussed whether global warming was actually a thing or not, 97.1% of papers posited that it was occurring, and because of human beings.
The reason they didn't consider the vast bulk of publications was because they didn't posit a position on the matter.
I know smart sceptics. You arent one of them. This is the analysis. Enjoy. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/meta
1 Motherfrogger 2018-05-12
Imagine trying to criticise the academic process without even knowing what a meta-analysis is
1 Nulltor 2018-05-12
I was reading through some holocaust denial blogs for the comments under the blog. That's where all the good meat is. The best one was essentially 'this old jew guy is claiming the holocaust happened. but if jews claim to be an honest and righteous people, then why is one lying about the holocaust happening?'.
Logic bomb motherfucker.
1 ellasmitherson 2018-05-12
You've obviously never been involved in research if you think there are infallible filters in place. Once a subject becomes as heavily politicized as climate change, good luck finding unbiased studies.
1 ghandicumia 2018-05-12
Nana knows about the climate because she watches the local news with the best doppler
1 late_50s_why 2018-05-12
I would trust him because this man singlehandedly designed space ships and flied them to the moon
1 TheScheerMeme 2018-05-12
His retardation is infuriating
1 Dagidugidai 2018-05-12
if we stop believing in "climate science" being "actual science" maybe we will stop believing in "podcast host" meaning "unemployed"
1 WNEW 2018-05-12
Hahaha, these are the people holding us back as the earth slowly cooks itself. Get ready for that ecological collapse in the near future guys!
1 SwampYankee 2018-05-12
Oh dear god. Now the high school drop out is an expert on the climate that knows more than most of the scientists on earth?
1 BeerCanThick 2018-05-12
A 60 year old man has never heard of the field of climatology? Whatever happened to Professor Anthony?
Forget your own mother, forget sobriety, hear cums flunout Anthony.
1 VigoTheCarpethian 2018-05-12
Looking at data and evidence isn’t going hard left
1 VigoTheCarpethian 2018-05-12
The tactics they used are the same the Tobacco companies, lead paint manufacturers and so on used to discredit science that will hurt their investors bottom line. Doubt can be raised on almost anything and people will believe it. Look at flat earthers.
You gotta be pretty ducking daft to think CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas. You gotta be a huge conspiracy nut to deny that global atmospheric carbon isn’t rising.
Then when you think of feedback loops such as the albedo effect, exponentially melting ice by the suns radiation hitting dark colored ground instead of reflecting off now non existent ice. Or how increased temperature result in permafrost melting releasing captured carbon and methane into the air.
It’s pretty fucking asinine to believe it is a hoax.