Again with the e-mails. Don't those scientists ever learn.

Next they'll be using our money to hire a PR firm. Fix up their image a little and re-package their product.

"Their strategy includes forming a nonprofit group to organize researchers and use their donations to challenge critics by running a back-page ad in the New York Times."

Any truth to the rumor that they're hiring Zatoitchy with a huge salary to head up the project? I understand that they want exclusive rights to the data from his scientific, peer-reviewed swimming pool also.

Plots???

What is wrong with the word plan???

Oh, it doesn't make it sound evil enough.

What a stupid article, only a stupid person would read that paper to find the stupid articles in it.

Ooh. An ad in a newspaper. That'll teach me.

Sorry boys, but the science just isn't there for AGW, but I do see a lot of evidence for a power play behind the claims.

"What a stupid article, only a stupid person would read that paper to find the stupid articles in it."

You're right...if you want the most recent straight scoop you gotta go to the National Enquirer 'cause you ain't gonna find any of it in the NYT the L.A. Times or the Boston Globe...right?
John Edwards will vouch for the Enquirer if you ask him.

The scientific community is just now beginning to realize the size of the plot against them.

Fighting back the corporate propaganda with NYT ad buys is a small but necessary step in order to begin reducing the massive cognitive dissonance on the subject already out there.

Sorry, Valis, but the consensus is in on AGW and it's a real and observable phenomenon.

There will always be questions, of course, as that's the very basis of the scientific process but to somehow suggest that we don't know enough now to be able to declare AGW a reality is madness.

Be Well.

"The scientific community is just now beginning to realize the size of the plot against them."

Oh?...I though it was just a few nuts on the fringe who would dare deny the horrific threat of man-made global warming.

"Sorry, Valis, but the consensus is in on AGW..."

If it's true that "the debate is over," why are you and your little friends still debating?

John Edwards will vouch for the Enquirer if you ask him.

So will Sarah Palin.

The National Enquirer's breaking of the story of Scary "Sluttypants" Palin's torrid affair with her cuckold husband Todd's ex-business partner proved that they have more credibility than the McCain vetting team!

^_^

Oh?...I though it was just a few nuts on the fringe who would dare deny the horrific threat of man-made global warming.

Wrong again, Pest.

Exxon Mobil, BP and other members of BigOil have all coughed up millions annually to spread misinformation about this issue in order to protect their bottom line. Using the same odious tactics and in some cases even the same "scientists" that Big Tobbacco used to successfully spread misinformation for decades.

If it's true that "the debate is over...

Never sed the debate was over, numbnutz.

Sed that there is enough data at this point to be able to say that AGW is a real and observable phenomenon despite the fact that there are still relevant questions out there.

Do learn to read at some point.

K?

Be Well.

"The National Enquirer's breaking of the story of Scary "Sluttypants" Palin's torrid affair with her cuckold husband Todd's ex-business partner proved that they have more credibility than the McCain vetting team!"

What? You think I'm some kind of zealot for Palin? McCain? Or maybe even Bush?
Oh... your retort was in the vein of, "My man isn't as bad as YOUR people, nya, nya nya." You wanted to hurt my feelings? LOL...Kinda juvenile, don'tcha think? But then, I don't expect much from your drug-addled posts so nothing is lost.

Be Gone.

"Never sed the debate was over, numbnutz."

You said, .."the consensus is in..," which would kinda connote that "the debate is over" wouldn't it. Of course I do realize that "the debate is over" is passe in the same manner as "global warming" is now "climate change." LOL...you and your little friends are shifty and quick on your feet, but we still see through you. Y'all are loads of fun :-)

Sed that there is enough data at this point to be able to say that AGW is a real and observable phenomenon despite the fact that there are still relevant questions out there.

Are you talking about the data that Phil Jones can't seem to find anymore?

You said, .."the consensus is in..," which would kinda connote that "the debate is over" wouldn't it.

No, it wouldn't.

But keep on making mistake after mistake.

S'fun fer Spud.

^_^

Environmental Groups must be destroyed.

~StunnedSilly

Wot you mean utterly like yer braincells?

You are such a silly troll.

1/10

Be Well.

Isn't it ironic that a scientist lost the data that could save the planet from certain destruction?

You can't disprove my theory because I lost the data. Na Na Na Na Na.

Yes. As soon as they dig themselves out from these blizzards, and figure out a way to get those ships unstuck from North Sea ice, they're going to come at us, guns blazing.

Here's a hint, though, that might reek too much of common sense for it to have occurred to these global warming hystericists: instead of planning your big meetings for Washington and New York in January, why not try Phoenix in August? At least then you're not likely to be embarrassed by the local weatherman, time and time again.

They want ads so their android GW believers can trade faith-based literature for porn.

The sky is falling.

I have the data to prove it. I just can't find it.