Over 59603

Natural Politics

earthquakes release CO2 -

BARRY SOETORO A.K.A. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA - is a USURPER. NOT a Natural Born Citizen as required by Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution. Not born of TWO PARENTS BOTH OF WHOM WERE U.S. CITIZENS at the time of his birth.

Past liberal crisis predictions didn't happen -

CO2 rising while temperatures flatten -

TAGS: climate change is natural
Rating: 4.42/5

More politifakes by OTC

OTC - April 18, 2015, 5:16 pm
Must be talking about the Westboro Baptists
fauxnews - April 18, 2015, 3:41 pm
PWNed lol
DebtToAmerica - April 18, 2015, 3:35 pm
"claims god is unknowable. claims to know god hates liberals."
fauxnews - April 17, 2015, 5:22 pm
TITLE TRANSLATION(in OTC speak):"Atmospheric science and climatology is a complex CONCEPT I don't fully understand. But somehow I fully understand that a man is responsible for his changing contradictory stances even if I don't think it applies to me."X-D

This is why they keep changing the name -

TAGS: heating cooling cycles are natural
Rating: 5/5

More politifakes by OTC

OTC - July 11, 2014, 1:28 am
Money and control
EmmaRoydes - July 7, 2014, 12:41 am
That's an easy one OTC, there's no money in natural cycles, but plenty of money in the manmade climate change hoax

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around -

Sun flares lowest in 100 years could mean a Little Ice Age is coming -


TAGS: natural born inconvenience
Rating: 3/5

More politifakes by crankyhead

crankyhead - September 21, 2012, 7:34 am
You can press as much as you like Groucho, there's still no way in hades I'm going to dignify a false dilemma.
GrouchoMarxist - September 20, 2012, 10:59 pm
Crank just said man up? Roads or businesses? Which is it crank?
GrouchoMarxist - September 20, 2012, 10:59 pm
Crank just said man up? Roads or businesses? Which is it crank?
motinet - September 20, 2012, 9:22 pm

It was not him. But the fact of the matter is, you cant get banned if you dont name call/attack. Take responsibility.
crankyhead - September 20, 2012, 9:22 pm
There ya go arnnatz. My mod b***on is gone. You can put your tinfoil away. You're welcome.
crankyhead - September 20, 2012, 8:21 pm
...to continue doing so. P.S. I just sent off that PM to motinet. So, you're welcome.
crankyhead - September 20, 2012, 8:20 pm
Don't be ashamed arnnatz. The best thing for you to do right now, isn't to run from the conversation. The best thing to do is to figure out how I'm demolishing you in our conversations, and then evolve your own strategies, in order to not allow me...
arnnatz - September 20, 2012, 8:16 pm
and I think the best thing for me to do at this point is just completely ignore you.
arnnatz - September 20, 2012, 8:15 pm
You do whatever you want to do, I really am just tired of your ignorance in all matters political. Speaking of manning up, try it some time. Oh, my, I'll probably get a week's ban for that one
crankyhead - September 20, 2012, 8:13 pm
Tell you what arnnatz, I'm going to PM the admin right now and ask him to get rid of my moderator b***on. Last thing I need is for you to start crying every time we have a conversation. Man up lil buddy, mmmmkay?
arnnatz - September 20, 2012, 8:13 pm
sure act all innocent. Hide behind that moderator b***on
crankyhead - September 20, 2012, 8:10 pm
arnnatz - September 20, 2012, 8:08 pm
Oh, so now you are going to claim it wasn't you who whined to the admins to get me banned for a day yesterday
crankyhead - September 20, 2012, 7:47 pm
Petition to have me banned then, you giant cry baby. Tell you what, I'll even sign the thing. Mmmmmkay pookums?
arnnatz - September 20, 2012, 7:44 pm
the only thing between you and a ban for a day is that moderator b***on.
crankyhead - September 20, 2012, 5:39 pm
Hey look everybody, Groucho doesn't have any problems voting for a man who finds it unfortunate to have american parents.
GrouchoMarxist - September 20, 2012, 12:00 am
Or how bamster got elected... Look everybody... Crank is a birther...

those Vikings -

Stupid Things Liberals Say -

Hillary Clinton Opposes Drilling For Oil & Natural Gas In The Arctic -

TAGS: hillary clinton offshore artic drilling oil natural gas obama epa greenpeace climate change global warming liberal democrats greenies warmists
Rating: 5/5

More politifakes by TheConservativeInsurgent

ipaprime - August 21, 2015, 8:57 am
If that were so Russia would not be needing to put a massive amount of scientific data they have collected over the years studying the artic to prove their claim. Also remember you are talking about a body of water covered by ice not land.
ipaprime - August 21, 2015, 8:54 am
Because they are doing it under license from that government. And by drilling a functional whether profitable or not it shows where the oil is and that it can be gotten when it does become profitable again.
Curlyrocks - August 20, 2015, 11:11 am
your country every 5 years to keep your claim. You don't need to waste millions on an unprofitable oil rig.
Curlyrocks - August 20, 2015, 11:09 am
If Dutch Royal Shell finds oil in the arctic how does that help Canada or America's claim to the arctic? That's a political issue that needs to be settled in international courts, all you need is some Inuit guy to walk over the ice in the name of
ipaprime - August 20, 2015, 1:16 am
That is what is known as strategic long term planning. A little something most liberals are incapable of.
ipaprime - August 20, 2015, 1:14 am
Oh you mean like the Russians. Who are even now putting forth a claim to the arctic oceans so that they will have control of what is thought to be 25%of the world's reserves.
Curlyrocks - August 19, 2015, 12:50 pm
Drilling in the arctic is no longer profitable and won't be for many years. Oil is lower than it should be and LNG can be extracted on the cheap through fracking. only people who don't understand business and are towing the conservative line approve.

Trump's Birther Idiocy -

Hillary Without Makeup -

Sire, the climate is getting warmer -

might makes right -

Deniers of natural climate change phenomenon -

late spring snow storm -

Pacific Decadal Oscillation -

liberal stupidity -

climate change natural cycles -

TAGS: global warming climate change natural event
Rating: 4.11/5

More politifakes by OTC

Dwydwyyr - March 14, 2015, 6:43 pm
Thank you,Ron,for having accepted our invitation and TESTING your hypothesis that you have any scientific credibility TTFN http://www.thescienceforum.com/trash-can/48703-why-does-scientific-community-continue-promote-consensus-man-made-climate-change.html
Dwydwyyr - March 14, 2015, 6:18 pm
I'm your huckleberry. Just say when.
calron - March 14, 2015, 5:11 pm
So basically you just admitting to not debating honestly.
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 11:18 pm
...that said, uh, thank you for the interest in my opinions?lol Have a good night, mate. Cheers
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 11:16 pm
But the real error in your argument is you think I care what you think. I dont. Not sure what you want from me. Sorry, I will never agree with you. Not sure what else to tell you. I get u want my attention. I only have so much to give you...
calron - March 8, 2015, 10:53 pm
d***, where did half my last comment go. I mixed up zimmerman and Anderegg studies flaws earlier.
calron - March 8, 2015, 10:52 pm
Anderegg number comes from leaving out those that do not publish enough and the undecided.
calron - March 8, 2015, 10:17 pm
And more from the study, " 9798% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field surveyed here support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change," disagreeing with NASA's spin. Thus NASA is biased.
calron - March 8, 2015, 10:12 pm
Here;s a statement directly from the study, "Though our compiled researcher list is not comprehensive nor designed to be representative of the entire climate science community," Unrepresentative sample by their own admission,
calron - March 8, 2015, 3:30 pm
And once again Ad Hominems in the place of facts and reason.
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 3:30 pm
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 3:28 pm
Ah, I love the sound of deniers lying and whining in the morning. Sounds like...victory.
calron - March 8, 2015, 3:25 pm
And once again, a link the points out the problem clearly. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/05/expert-embarrassment-in-climate-change/ Also note how what the paper itself says is different from the headline NASA gave.
calron - March 8, 2015, 3:18 pm
Those are not NASA'a numbers, they are Anderegg's. The numbers come from a poll of 75 climatologists out of 3146 where the questions asked did not match the conclusion. I gave the evidence of this recently, and you choose to ignore it.
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 3:12 pm
So a reputable organization like NASA, and every major scientific organization in the states they list as backing them, are lying? Again, NASA has no problem listing this? So.....are they lying?
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 3:11 pm
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ "Consensus: 97% of climate scientists agree" So, again, if this is SO ambiguous...then why is NASA advertising it as fact?
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 3:09 pm
So NASA is lying?
calron - March 8, 2015, 3:08 pm
I see you are still throwing around those false numbers. The vast majority of scientists have not given an opinion. And if you only include those that have you still wouldn't get numbers that high. Instead many opinions are ignored.
OTC - March 8, 2015, 1:29 pm
So their 2013 report will be a follow up to their 2011 report which is a follow up to their 2009 report (and peer reviewed)
OTC - March 8, 2015, 1:24 pm
And you do realize that the 2011 report was an update to their 2009 report they published, right?
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 1:07 pm
...So, again....visiting some old friends on mountain BIKE (lol) to thank them. One of them is named Mike. Funny.Anyhow,off to enjoy this beautiful day while it last. Hope you can do the same wherever you're at. Have a good one, mate. Cheers =)
OTC - March 8, 2015, 1:07 pm
Actually they will release an updated report soon
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 1:06 pm
...this bombshell you think you are dropping was a pebble that made no waves. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 1:05 pm
...their peers would find to be unacceptable. Which is why they don't push too hard. Also, they point out their studies are in some sense being taken out of context for political purpose. All in all, just a big bag of s'uck. Which is why...
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 1:04 pm
Also, those scientists have failed to follow up on their studies, allowing their work to remain discredited when other REAL scientists would've re-attempted a study. That, and two of them acknowledge they receive funding for their work that...
OTC - March 8, 2015, 1:03 pm
Lol, you had me wondering about those friends you were going to see
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 1:02 pm
Already looked into it. Their peers reject their work because they don't follow through on proper methodology and their evidence was borrowed from elsewhere and long since debunked, hence my 2011 objection.
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:50 pm
*mike? lololol.. *bike
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:50 pm
I was on mountain mike actually. Doh! Cheers indeed.
OTC - March 8, 2015, 12:43 pm
By the way faux, how are you going to visit those friends? A fossil fuel vehicle? cheers mate
OTC - March 8, 2015, 12:40 pm
And here's the bio on those three ju.k scientists http://climatechangereconsidered.org/lead-authors/
OTC - March 8, 2015, 12:35 pm
Thanks for showing your ignorance. The Heartland didn't write that report, but here are more reviews of that report http://climatechangereconsidered.org/reviews-of-climate-change-reconsidered-ii-physical-science/
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:22 pm
...okay, visiting some old friends to thank them. Off to enjoy this beautiful day while it last. Hope you can do the same wherever you're at. Have a good one, mate. Cheers =)
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:21 pm
...you can't have it both ways. Just like, you can have your OWN list of junk scientists, but in this world there is only one list of real, reputable mainstream scientists and nearly 97-99% of them have concluded man-made GW is real....
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:19 pm
...yet, with that logic you shouldn't trust organizations like the Heartland institute since they ARE paid by conservative donors. Yet you were doing cartwheels when someone listed the biased liberal skepticalscience as a source who has liberal backers...
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:17 pm
CORRECTION OTC (Said.No.real.scientist) You list biased junk scientists hired by conservative thinktanks. Gee, and yet you accuse NASA of being a biased source? lololol.. Last I checked, NASA works for governments conservative AND liberal...
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:14 pm
*yawn* 2011- outdated. Those 'real' scientists are not considered real by their peers. The Heartland Institute is an American conservative thinktank. Nope, you confused more biased junk scientists for real - like Wei-Hack Soon. Next.
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:12 pm
...again, whatever political motivation you have to refusing to acknowledge the work and consensus of these scientists is, at best, philosophical in your unique interpretation or, at worst, pathologically contrarian in nature.
OTC - March 8, 2015, 12:12 pm
3 real scientists report https://www.heartland.org/policy-documents/climate-change-reconsidered-2011-interim-report
OTC - March 8, 2015, 12:09 pm
“the net effect of continued warming and rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere is most likely to be beneficial to humans, plants, and wildlife.”
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:09 pm
And copouts like "everyone knows the guvmint lies" or "everyone knows scientists are liburls" are just redherrings. The widely accept work of scientist worldwide are not going to be disproven on a messageboard here or elsewhere lol
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:07 pm
..Why does every single reputable mainstream scientific organization in the states and elsewhere still say:"MMCC is reality,is human induced,and unequivocable"? What do you know that they dont?lol Or are you gonna put the tinfoil hat on and cry CONSPIRACY
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:05 pm
...now they have to prove you wrong. No, the burden is still on you to prove you are right. The near unanimity of papers, studies, and climatologists in the world have already weighed in on this.For instance, why hasn't NASA changed it's mind about this?
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:03 pm
...There is little to no evidence for a supernatural Jesus or a magical Santa Claus. So it is generally accepted by science that they don't exist. However, just because a handful of junk scientists come forward with 'evidence' doesn't mean that...
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:02 pm
..by every major reputable scientific organization in the world, etc. The burden is not on them to prove you are wrong. The burden is on you to prove you are right. The figurative a***ogy on this in logic is Jesus or Santa Claus...
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 12:00 pm
So I get what you are saying OTC. You are just wrong. The fallacy you are committing is called an appeal to ignorance - a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proved false. MMCC is generally accepted as true by NASA, by....
fauxnews - March 8, 2015, 11:58 am
You are being misleading again. No one said CO2 is bad. Just too much of it added to what is normally a normal cycle.
OTC - March 8, 2015, 11:32 am
OTC - March 8, 2015, 11:27 am
CO2 has an aerial fertilization effect, so the more CO2 there is, the more robust plants get and the more robust plants are, the more CO2 they absorb. More of that 'junk' science called "CO2 sequestration" in the "bioshere"
OTC - March 8, 2015, 11:05 am
Crops don't grow in the winter, so they are doing fine with all this added CO2, but a cooling will shorten growing cycles aand create a food shortage as it did during the LIA.
OTC - March 8, 2015, 10:59 am
The MWP lasted about 300 years followed by a Little Ice Age. Since then there has been warming for almost 250 yrs and global temperatures are starting to plateau. History of the LIA shows we should be more worried about cooling, not warming
OTC - March 8, 2015, 10:48 am
Interestingly, during the Medieval Warm Period, CO2 was about 280ppm and sea surface temps. were a lot higher than they are today with 40% greater CO2 at about 400ppm. Shouldn't SST be higher today with more CO2?
calron - March 7, 2015, 8:50 pm
As can see, most took mo position and the second biggest is a**umption rather than proof and that and the third biggest are added to the top column to create and impression that is not warranted by the evidence.
calron - March 7, 2015, 8:47 pm
http://i2.wp.com/www.realsceptic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/agnotology.png?resize=481%2C273 and https://jaffijoe.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/table-21.png
calron - March 7, 2015, 8:41 pm
Repeating a claim over and over doesn't make it any more true. Actually polls of scientists and multiple studies that you have been shown before show that the consistence that claim to exist doesn't really exist at all. That facts are against you here.
fauxnews - March 7, 2015, 8:13 pm
Says you.However,the mainstream scientific community is almost unanimous in its conclusion that CO2 induced man-made CC is a reality.At best you're disagreement is philosophical in how you view that.At worst,(and more likely)you're being contrarian.
calron - March 7, 2015, 5:11 pm
Actually no they do not. The majority haven't stated an opinion and of the ones that did, you need to lump two or more of the things I mentioned in on group in order to get close to 50%.
OTC - March 4, 2015, 5:09 pm
Your welcome. And thanks for clarifying you being a sheeple. Later mate
fauxnews - March 4, 2015, 4:53 pm
Agreed, since non-mainstream science is junk science, that certainly explains you and your views. Thx for the clarification, mate. :-) Have a good day. Cheers =)
OTC - March 4, 2015, 4:34 pm
The key word was 'mainstream', not news or scientific
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 1:23 pm
Anywho. Not sure what that red-herring about my "The Guardian" post from two weeks ago had to with what we were speaking about now. But gotta run anyways. For now, maybe we should just agree to disagree. Have a good day, mate Cheers =)
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 12:59 pm
Not at all. Apples and oranges. Comparing the news media to the scientific community would be like comparing a circus to an accredited University. The scientific community is not the news media, though they are misrepresented by them all the time.
OTC - March 3, 2015, 12:54 pm
I'm guessing you believe the mainstream news as well
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 10:18 am
The truth is I cant accept your opinion-based interpretation of science. But I accept(just fine)the widely-accepted mainstream views of the science community,which's held by virtually every climatologist worldwide.Not sure what else to tell u, mate.Cheers
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 10:13 am
Science indeed shows many causes. But their conclusion is all that matters on this debate: that man-made contributions of CO2 are disrupting the natural CO2 cycle so badly that they are causing GW which,in turns, contributes to catastrophic climate change
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 10:11 am
Accept? Every major scientific organization in the states and world wide agrees with my stance. Visit their websites if you doubt that. Science doesn't show "other causes", just junk science blogs from political sites.
OTC - March 3, 2015, 10:03 am
No, it's political to you and zeit who think its my political belief when science shows other causes to climate change that you just can't seem to accept
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 9:40 am
You say affecting, I say causing. *cue song* "You say "potato" I say Potato.."
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 9:39 am
Misleading. The final one is what the scientific data is telling the scientists. It's political to you, not them. To them it's just science.
fauxnews - March 3, 2015, 9:38 am
Misleading. The near majority believe "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal,and is human induced."
OTC - March 3, 2015, 8:16 am
No calron, that last one is a 'political belief' while the two in the middle will get you ridiculed, so that just leaves one belief, you know, that 97% thing
calron - March 3, 2015, 2:25 am
No, their are at least four different scientific opinions on this subject. Some belief that most is man made, some believe that just some it is man mad, other believe that the warming is not serious and a few disagree that no warming is man caused.
OTC - March 3, 2015, 1:26 am
"Affecting"? I thought it was "causing"? Did they change their stance again?
Zeitguy - March 2, 2015, 10:12 pm
Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Darwin, and Einstein don't care either.
Zeitguy - March 2, 2015, 10:10 pm
Current science demonstrates that man made greenhouse gases are unequivocally affecting the earth's normal cyclical gradual climate change by a level that needs to be recognized. Science doesn't care about your political beliefs.
Curlyrocks - March 2, 2015, 4:00 pm
Well to be fair, they also blindly follow evil villains who want to block out the sun (the main source of climate change), they just don't mention it in the brochure as it will scare most people off.

would man-made global warming be an issue -

TAGS: climate change natural cycle
Rating: 4.11/5

More politifakes by OTC

Zeitguy - February 23, 2015, 10:39 pm
Man-made global warming is not an issue if only science based logistical conclusions dictate the original premise,

Natural Rights -

TAGS: natural rights atheism declaration independence
Rating: 2.2/5

More politifakes by fauxnews

calron - February 11, 2016, 2:12 am
So a robo-rely. I already shared where the DoI mentions God and it doesn't list those rights as 'natural'.
truthteller - February 10, 2016, 5:45 pm
report me all you want. the problem with you radical tea baggers is you think your sh*t don't stink. When in glass houses, don't throw stones, eh? Flinging poo in there is probably a bad idea too. catch you on the flip side zealot.
fauxnews - February 10, 2016, 1:31 pm
So more of your home spun bulverism.Got it.Well then,SEEcomment#79037thru#79041* for what I think about that then :-D *(and the nice thing about that comment-if you follow its instructions-is I should only have to do this once for this thread).Cheers :-)
calron - February 10, 2016, 2:15 am
Because you overlooked what The DoI actually says, two fold are your errors this time, in order to try to do what ever you are doing.
ipaprime - February 10, 2016, 1:15 am
And by the way I will be reporting you to the moderator for using abusive language.
ipaprime - February 10, 2016, 1:14 am
T.T. you know nothing about me. Yet you insult me and accuse me of trying to stifle free speech. So I can say with a clean conscience that you are an arrogant, ignorant, immature individual who has no respect for other people.
fauxnews - February 9, 2016, 4:36 am
Because I made a poster as a counter-point to your poster? lol I was actually directing that to the fundies that visit here. I just used your poster as an excuse to do that.
calron - February 9, 2016, 2:27 am
Looks like FN got his b***on pushed. :)
truthteller - February 8, 2016, 11:45 am
but what I can prove for a fact is that the Declaration of Independence was written by men,not anyone's God.And that protects my right as a man to worship whatever the f**k I want,protected from tyranny,your's especially.Get with the program or GTFO,troll
truthteller - February 8, 2016, 11:40 am
Im a Muslim,I pay my taxes and respect the law and yes I vote conservative. Getting sick of some of you brothers trying to convert some of us,and deport the rest of us.If there's a God,you have no more proof that he's Christian than I do that he's Islamic
truthteller - February 8, 2016, 11:36 am
You skip over the glaringly obvious flaws in your own thinking every time you open your mouth.If dont like others expressing their right to speak out against religious tyranny on a political site then take your condescending attitude and insults elsewhere
truthteller - February 8, 2016, 11:32 am
radical? Says the pot to the hallucinated kettle. Listen up troll, you know American ain’t a theocracy. You also know in our nation not everyone has to believe in God. pretending that you don't is a very lame strategy.
ipaprime - February 8, 2016, 1:12 am
What God thinks we should have is life, liberty, and being able to pursue that which makes us happy. Please open your mind a little so you can think properly mr. radical sir.
truthteller - February 7, 2016, 11:11 pm
Only to someone from Iran or Korea or a crazed fringe group would that be considered bs. Maybe to them that's bs. To us Americans, we call that the fruits of democracy. catch you on the flip side, radical
truthteller - February 7, 2016, 11:06 pm
brother, there's nothing in the Declaration of Independence that says it's okay for a few to impose their religion or beliefs on the many. The DOI was designed as a statement against tyranny of all kinds: government, religion and everything under the sun.
ipaprime - February 7, 2016, 9:49 pm
To bad you never read the Declaration of Independence faux or you would know how wrong you are. B.S. reply in 3,2,...

AGW Cult -

TAGS: climate change global warming natural
Rating: 1.95/5

More politifakes by OTC

Zeitguy - June 6, 2015, 8:44 pm
Science at it's best perhaps, but love the earth on fire image. Great for evoking an emotional response.

natural climate change -