crash.net home
crash.net home
» Register or Sign-In    Email:   Password:



MENU

Interactive





Add to Google
»

Home

»

Topic List

»

OFFICIAL: CO2 induced global warming is bunkum

Sort Comments:
yeah tru.global warming theory is a BUNKUM
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by baris - Unregistered (106 days ago)
Christopher Monckton is not a climatologist and Dr Mahorasy did not make that comment, a badly researched article.
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by richard - Unregistered (106 days ago)
The misunderstanding over Monckton was the result of a typo... quote atribution has been corrected.

Apologies.
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Pete - Unregistered (106 days ago)
 1 people agree.  2 people disagree.

Big business will always try and debunk anything that might cost them money.

As shown by big tobacco and it's payed ..cough... "medical experts" who denied the link between tobacco and lung cancer and heart desease.

Anyway what has this to do with motor racing ?

Poor form from Crashnet I think..
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Rob Wilson (106 days ago)
You are on the road car section, Rob.
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Jimmer - Unregistered (106 days ago)
 1 people agree.

I posted my comment in "General"

And stick with what I said except my questioning what this has to do with motor racing.

Cheers Jimmer
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Rob Wilson (106 days ago)
You tout Roy Spencer as a non-biased member of IPCC?

You gotta be kidding. The fact that IPCC let me participate in their report in the first place only shows that IPCC included as many people as possible.

Roy Spencer is still a climate skeptic to the bone. Always has, always will be.
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Markus - Unregistered (106 days ago)
 1 people disagree.

While I think there are some very good reasons to not believe that mankind is the main source of global warming, the ones attributed to me in this post are incorrect. I never reported to the IPCC on anything, as is reported in this story, and the explanation for my skepticism listed here appears to be an incomprehensible combination of several issues which is hopelessly mangled. The link to my web page is, however, real, and anyone interested in the science as I see it can find more details there.
-Roy W. Spencer
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Roy Spencer - Unregistered (106 days ago)
Global warming has always been a hoax. You can see the original recycled version
here ... search on youtube "Global Cooling: The Coming Ice Age"

Must see TV for all you folks that are too young to remember the first try. try
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by bill-tb - Unregistered (106 days ago)
I hope this will be the final nail in that pure idiot's, Al Gore's, coffin. What I have a hard time believing is how easily so many people around the world were duped in the first place.
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Bill - Unregistered (106 days ago)
Hey, this is not very fair, I stand to lose millions if the global warming is fiction like they are sayin. Aww Man, it's like the 2000 election all over again !
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by Al Goar - Unregistered (106 days ago)
 1 people agree.

Posted by richard - Unregistered (15 hours ago) "

Yet if some climatologist with dodgy computer models only taking into account 100 years of records, you'd believe them.

Rob Wilson.

Ever notice Big Business is cashing in on Global warming ermm Climate Change????? It's costing them nothing but profits you fool! This isn't about the environment, it's about taxing us to the death to squeeze the remaining hard earned dollars out of us..wake up!
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by King-Leonidas - Unregistered (106 days ago)
"apparently"
To whom? Cite, please?

"the lead author"
Who is that? Name, please?

"written"
Who says? Got a reference?

Quick -- what year is it now? 2008, right.

Are you talking about the 2001 Lindzen statement on feedback, from the Third assessment? That's the only thing I can find meeting the description you give.

If not, what _are_ you talking about? Can you give a source for these claims?
Report Abuse Agree with this comment Disagree with this comment
Posted by hank - Unregistered (103 days ago)
Page 1 of 1
Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.