FORECAST FOR JUNE 4TH 2021, SALT LAKE CITY, PREDICTING “NEAR RECORD HIGHS”

FORECAST FOR JUNE 4TH 2021, SALT LAKE CITY, PREDICTING “NEAR RECORD HIGHS”

June 3rd, 2021, predicting near record temperatures for June 4th, 2021.

The “NEWS” was that tomorrow’s forecast could produce record breaking highs. Part of the forecast predicted that June 4th could also be the earliest SLC area would hit triple digit highs.  Did not happen. “They” tried to make it appear that 100 was reached but you must look at the reality.

At 5:00 PM temperatures start to drop. Seldom do temperatures rise after 5:00 PM, if ever. The temperature stayed at 98 degrees for hours, even an hour after 5:00 PM, then suddenly it bolted to 100 degrees, like it was thinking it needed to respond to a command.

If you doubt this then you have no idea what science is, partially because you have never exercised it.

Science is change. If you have not paid attention, or scrutinized past events and patterns, you will not only be oblivious to reality and science, but you will remain part of the truly, ignorant masses. Everybody gets messages on their phone about temperatures, at any given moment. From where do these arrive? Do these temperatures come from the centralized (bad sign) official source? What is the official source? Have you thought about that? No? Do you know the difference between intellect and intelligence? Do you know what deductive reason is? No? Then do not question my observations.

It is all part of global hoaxing, warming, that is not warming. Please, learn scientific methodology and find scientific methodology, even just one characteristic of it, in any of the so-called climate sites.

Go to my section of CLIMATE CHANGE/GLOBAL WARMING and read, learn.

THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN CLIMATE CHANGE, GLOBAL WARMING, “SCIENCE”

Original publication on SLC Craigslist, June 15, 2016, in response to a post by Utardia, a “writer”, regurgitator of marxist/liberal climate dogma.

The burden of scientific proof rests with the prosecution. There is two basic results of science: proving a theory or hypothesis, or failing to prove a theory or hypothesis.

Utardia, that dimwit lying crap-superstar, claims I need to provide proof. Is that proof of a negative? Is that proof that where I stand exists?

A tradition is immovable until it is movable, by something new, and obvious. Global hoaxing, I mean warming, is magnificently NOT obvious, except to dictatorial goons making big bucks off others’ fears, and obvious to bogus scientists extrapolating something from clearly NOTHING. When I say nothing I mean no data, no pre-test, no post test, no control group, no measurements, but lots of polluting and “reinterpreting” standard, immovable data.

It is all a fraud, a lie based on imaginary demons and fire breathing dragons, heating up the world. Where are the dragons other than the nether reaches of political scientists’ ever-augmenting ethereal interpretations of imaginary science from cosmological shock troops?

I might add that all those innumerable “climate scientists” do not exist. There are writers galore, political puppets who quote each others’ papers and stories of studies.

“The oceans will rise by 20 feet by the year 2015”, 144,000 Witnesses of Jehovah will be taken heavenward in 1918, I mean 1933, I mean 1975, I mean 1999, I mean okay who is this Jehovah guy”? “The climate system will kill millions by 2012”. Pictures of moose dying, deserts and dead fish on the shores all cause world-wide stench by 2010”. Obama will turn back the rise of the oceans by shear will power.

Some will argue he did it. Then why do we need anything else? Why do we need political exertion, taxation and subservience to the democrat party and liberals when obama can do it all?

Come on people, the oceans have not risen, temperatures have dropped. It is colder today, it cools off at night, and summers are shorter. Fewer people die from heat waves today than they did 20, 30 and 40 years ago.

We stand on solid ground of tradition. Somebody designed a thermometer well over a century ago, and that same thermometer is the standard.

What is the standard?

Water boils at 212 degrees at sea level, and freezes at 32 degrees. There is no change in that. That is the standard. Who will challenge that? Who would even think that this fact is not one of the world’s most reliable templates? 

Why do global hoaxers, I mean warmers, even attempt to change these standards?

We can always make new thermometers at the boiling point, and and it is still the standard because it is still the boiling point and we design and change OURSELVES to that fact.

Global hoaxers, I mean warmers, have been trying to change We, the People, and reality to their inconsistent and shifting predictions. They have no standards because they are sloppy, pretentious, anti-science comic-cons. Where is the data?

Data is not data unless it has a standard and a means of measuring preconditions and new, or changing conditions. This is science, the beginning of science.

How do we measure time? We measure it by change. We make a 24 hour day of a time frame between sunrise and another sunrise. We don’t dictate that we want 24 hours in a day, and make the planet rotate different. But that is the approach global hoaxers, I mean warmers, have taken.

We do not look at the sunrise and try to slow it down so we can have 25 hour days. That is ludicrous. It borders on insanity if not full blown lunacy. But that is what global hoaxers, I mean warmers, are trying to do with no data, no pre-test, no post-test, no measurements, and no sea level markers. They have not even tried to present this simple experiment because it is a failure every time.

Surely, somewhere along the way, maybe 10 years ago, maybe 20 or 30 years ago, someone, a real scientist, must have surely stuck a stick in the water and measured ocean levels regularly to show ocean-level rise. Why has no scientist presented this data? Would this data be irrefutable if it could be found to show a rise in ocean levels? Absolutely, and I would concur. But there is not one single reference to a stick in a rock anywhere? Absolutely nothing! NOAA, for example, has absolutely nothing that represents a stick in a rock, or anything an intellect could imagine and design to measure change.

So, I ask, are oceans rising? Surely it must be obama that stopped the rise, with just his word.

How much did it rise before he made the promise? ZERO! That was a  pretty safe bet for him, was it not.

It must be zero, otherwise dem/lib politico/scientists would have shown us. NOTHING!

The burden of proof is always on the upstarts, the new science, the new theories and hypotheses.

I am a cop, standing in the middle of the street, directing traffic. Who will argue that traffic flows at my standard, stable, already existing presence?

It takes a pre-test to assert the variables for the study, and it takes measurements of some sorts (maybe time lapse of driver response due to traffic officer’s directions, as compared to time lapse when traffic officer is not present).

You see, dear reader, the burden of proof is not only on the new science, or new theory or new hypothesis to show a change, but it is a heavy burden to first show the standards by which change will be measured and then presented as illuminating.

There is nothing obvious in dem/lib global hoaxing, I mean warming, except the raging lunacy of pseudo-scientists fabricating fear and catastrophe from lunatics’ imaginations, all done for money.

It is not my burden to provide truth to an existing science. The burden of proof, in science and almost everything, lies solely with the party making new claims or challenging established thought and tradition. The burden of proof lies with those trying to show change. Science is change, measurable change. If it is not measured there is no data, no measurable change and, hence, no science.

Global hoaxing, I mean warming, is the new claim of change, without a shred or attempt to show the change.

I see it this way. When I was a boy, some days when I would arrive at home after school I would walk in the door and smell baking. Imagine I walked in the house, and my mother says, “do you smell that?” Smell what, I ask. “The baking bread, she replies.” No.

“Well, I smell it and it is good”, she claims. Hmmm I do not smell anything.

“No matter”, she says, “will you wash the bread pans please?”

What bread pans? “The ones I baked the bread with”, she she says.

Ok, I guess you see bread pans.

“Of course I do”, she emphatically states, “right there on the counter by the sink.”

Okay, I believe you. Here I am, washing bread pans.

When I am finished washing imaginary bread pans, I sit at the kitchen table and my mother then places an empty plate before me and says, “enjoy the freshly baked bread”.

Okay mom.

In this anecdote, would you think my mother had lost something? Why do global hoaxers try the same with you and I? Are they insane or dishonest?

Global hoaxing, I mean warming, has the burden of proof, and that is why it fails so miserably. There is not even an attempt to provide pre-test conditions, post-test, hypothesis. My mother could have placed store-bought bread on plate, and tried to convince me she had baked it. Without the pre-test conditions: aroma of freshly baked bread, used bread pans and flour on the counter, I am not convinced. The global hoaxing, I mean warming, community, that does not exist except in papers by writers, tries the same. They show nothing with which a comparison, or change can be made.

I come home from school occasionally to the smell of freshly baked brread, and that is a change from the day before, and many days prior. Where is the change in the global hoaxing, I mean warming, claims?

Do we remember our science projects in grade school? The lab paper had a section for observation.

Today’s global hoaxers, I mean warmers, cannot even present “observations”. They make all kinds of claims and protests. Well, they try to present observations but any so-called observations I have investigated are always observations of something else, they claim is connected to itself. They present fear, based upon imaginary dragons fabricated for pseudo-scientists’ financial gain; fabricated by monster-imagining writers.

After the fact observations are nothing if there is no pre-fact observations. The global hoaxers never provide pre-test observations, only claims.

Where are the observations, measurements, standard by which change can be observed?

How can global hoaxers, I mean warmers, make observations without anything to observe, and how can they draw conclusions without anything to observe taken from nothing presented? There is an incredible lack of connection in all this global hoaxing “concluding” without establishing and observing.

Did the morons, for example, observe dying polar bears? Where?

Did the boneheads observe a rise in the sea level of the stick in the rock on the shore? Did the rock move? Did the boneheads move the rock? Who would do such a grievous assault on science, fact and truth itself? Liars, with a political motive. Welcome to global hoaxing!

It is not my responsibility to prove another’s theory wrong, it is the party challenging established thought and tradition that is responsible for proving truth and credibility of his or her claims and theories. Until he or she provides data, measurements, clinical and or laboratory work, the theories remain theories.

The change of scientific belief is not a fact until it is actually factual. All the global hoaxers have is fear, fabrication, and quoting other’s fears and fabrications: all for money.

The NOAA site is a fantasy of global hoaxers, I mean warmers, continually augmenting fear from fear, and from third party fear and fabrication. It is easy to see when they start talking in circles.

Science is proved, often, when scientists and the free market are convinced. I have used the invention of the rifle as an example.

When rifling was first theorized and explained, denying a better flight by a rifled bullet compared to a musket ball was accepted. That is science. After obvious proofs and evidence: observations of rifle accuracy compared with musket accuracy, denying rifles provide a better, more accurate flight, was considered rifling denial. The deniers did not last long. They were killed in the battle lines because they refused to adapt to the science: the proof by observing pre-test and post-test. They refused to change their views to fact and reality.

It is logic retardation that dimwit utardia tries to present nothing to the public as a rational argument. Global hoaxing presents observation-less observations: unsubstantiated claims.

Again, where are the observations? Where are the obvious results, of something, anything, even attempts to lie or deceive?

We are not asking for fear mongering, predictions, models or quotes from others without the necessary facets of science. We want observations and the obvious, nothing else will do. We want IRREFUTABLE science.

IF COVID ACTUALLY EXISTS AND IF COVID IS TRANSMITTED THE WAY THE EXPERTS AND POLITICAL AGENTS CLAIM, THEN HOW DID NUNS SEQUESTERED FROM THE GENERAL POPULATION CONTRACT IT?

This commentary is in response to a comment on Craigslist. I have provided no quotes or references, but this is how I have waged the war on craigslist for 12 years. I respond to the already existing post, writing to the readers and not the author or agent posting the comment. I do not flag to remove posts because I want readers to see just how whacky, dishonest and vague dem/libs are and how near absolutely unsubstantiated dem/lib claims are.

IF COVID ACTUALLY EXISTS AND IF COVID IS TRANSMITTED THE WAY THE EXPERTS AND POLITICAL AGENTS CLAIM, THEN HOW DID NUNS SEQUESTERED FROM THE GENERAL POPULATION CONTRACT IT? WE MUST DEDUCE SEQUESTERED NUNS WERE INFECTED IN WAYS OTHER THAN THE CLAIMED MEANS.

If nuns, locked away, caught COVID, it is not passed how the non-scientific scientists and political health agents claim.

Can anyone say deductive reason, scientific methodology?

Masks, lockdowns serve a different purpose, unknown to We, the People.

The bastard National Governors Association held secret meetings in which they were instructed as to how to work this collusion to seize our country.

It is not for money. Soros and the rich already have more than they can spend. In addition they easily seem to make more.

The democrat/bolshevik politically elite are executing a genocidal plan and everyone is afraid of a bug nobody has identified or tested.

We are also being set up for property seizures with another, non-governmental, unrepresentative, unelected agency with more power than congress. The EPA is advertising a new mysterious killer that does not kill. Radon gas is non-existent.

Just as specialists can enter private passwords to tamper with vote counting; just as the COVID exists without a shred of scientific methodology involved in any part; just as congress has nothing to do with chemtrails spewing lung irritants such as aluminum and barium metals; just as the EPA endorses mercury poison and rat poison (fluoride), without congress making laws; just as the politicians claim they are working with business for a brand new fascist economy and lockdown; just as politicians claim they have the science for COVID that does not exist; just as politicians claim they have the science for global warming/climate change, that does not exist; so too goes the political involvement in democracy, taking representative government from We, the People, and nobody sees it.

How ignorant, as a people we have become.

This is war, they declared and execute it before our eyes, and the masses think the rulers like, respect, and serve us.

Hang them all! Start with the anti-representation, democracy-mongers, the democrats.

Global warming pre and post test measurements and data. Written 6/21/16

Global warming pre and post test measurements and data.
A real scientist would look at NOAA and the la-la-land liberal fabrications and ask, where is the pre-test? Where is the post test? Where is the control group or control data, and where is the test subject or data?
Did NOAA have satellite pictures back in 1880? Did NOAA take water temperatures in the middle of the Pacific ocean in 1880?
Why the pretense of comparatives? Is it an attempt to trick fools and drones into believing there was data to compare with, way back then?
NOAA admitted some time ago the data that scientists collected over a century ago was flawed. It was a theory, and is still just a theory. The standards and measures for lengths and temperatures is still the original standards, so how could the science have been flawed then?
If NOAA, and the fake NASA site claim the data collected 100 years ago is flawed, why did they adjust everything down? If there is a two percent to four percent margin of error (the standard in science) the data can be adjusted either way. Margin of error accounts for adjustments both ways. Real scientists would know that, and proceed with that scientific methodology, regardless of the outcome. Not so with NOAA. Why? Why does NOAA adjust only to their predetermined agenda? It must be a predetermined agenda otherwise NOAA would have employed real scientific methodology and treated data with a margin of error to correct for either deviance. They refused to do what scientists do.
Did NOAA have satellites in the 1880s, or did they send out a crew daily to measure the ocean surface temperatures in the middle of the pacific? That must have been one hell of a chain of row boats.
A chain of row boats, with the original standards and measures would have been much more accurate, being in the moment when the norms and standards were established, rendering the most pretentious scientific, liberal, political assault on science and technology in the future, moot.
The audacity of these moronic-sub-scientists to think they are more qualified to adjust the standards and measures today of those that made them scores and hundreds of years ago, is astounding.
Every time I go to the sites and check the claims (not even theories), of these buffoon dem/libs, I have to laugh.
It is like mickey mouse, a cartoon, writing a science fiction novel, and dem/libs guffawing and harrumphing when someone asks if the writer is a cartoon. “Oh no, he’s real, they claim, he’s a fact, its true that cartoons can come to life.”
How utterly moronic can these stupid dem/libs get?
And then the pigs, the slovenly mutts, flag, remove and criticize my posts. They attack and allow me, and truth itself, no defense. That is just sick. It is sick, psycho, liberal pseudo-science.
What do we expect from neanderthal scientists, measuring the heat of a volcano by jumping in? Actually they measure it by throwing someone else in, or convincing the ignorant masses to jump in for a free phone.
Morons, dem/lib dimwits, science-retards!

RE: “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” Originally written 6/21/16.

RE: “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.”
The following is my response to a post on craigslist in Salt Lake City, June 21, 2016.
In this post the “writer” plagiarizes NOAA with the title of the post and numerous claims throughout.
I write:
Show us the evidence.
What is a climate system? Is dimwit dem/lib talking about a “clime”, or maybe a weather front? These are real terms that reveal real science, understanding, and real knowledge, while “.warming of the climate system…” is at best a non-scientific construction of an alien-structured grammatical mess. Who, what, fabricated this poor collection of words and terms?
Do these dem/libs, fabricating goofy terms and words, think others will wet themselves and follow in line behind simpletons that cannot construct a rational thought?
What is a “…climate system”? What is, “Warming of the climate system…”? Climate is warming and cooling. This dem/lib is speaking in circles to confuse others, and dazzle unsuspecting readers with his/her/its sophistry (look it up).
Scientific evidence? How could there be evidence when there is no data? Where are the volumes and pages of lists of university studies by PHD students submitting their theses?
Where are the measurements, data? Evidence is non-existent without data and a measurement or two. Anyone can pick a topic, go to a library, look up in the indexes for studies done by PHD students on almost anything. This is cutting edge stuff. Anyone can go to the library, look up climate topics and find numerous studies showing the temperatures are dropping.
Suppose I make a claim to illustrate my superior knowledge.
“I know a yard is longer than a meter”, I state.
“How do you know?”, you ask. I reply. “I just know.”
You press, “how long is a yard?” I say, “pretty long, the evidence shows it.” You ask, “how long is a meter?”
I reply, “almost as long as a yard.” You think you have me so you ask me, “If you are comparing the two, how can you know one is longer than the other if you cannot actually compare them. How can you know anything about either measurement if you refer to no studies that compare them, and if you cannot define how long either is?” I reply, “I just know it, the evidence is there.”
Anyone, at this point would ask, “what evidence?”
Besides the fact that I would be dead wrong regarding a yard being longer than the meter, one could also note I totally rejected scientific methodology.
A meter is a full yard plus 3.6 more, MORE inches, making a meter longer than a yard. That is a comparison using a common standard of measuring, to compare the two. This qualifies as data applied. Using one or the other as a standard, and then comparing, would be considered data.
You ask me again, to explain the comparison between the two, and how I can make a comparison without actually comparing variables; without common measurements or data to compare. I reply, “scientific evidence for measuring the measure of a longer yard than a meter, is unequivocal.” At this point you realize you are talking to an uneducated, egomaniacal moron, just as we, the educated and honest conservatives try to communicate with dem/libs, living in “I am special in liberal la-la-land.”
Using an inch to measure two “systems”, and then comparing, we see that a meter is longer than a yard, but a dem/lib would argue against that, if it meant he or she could propagate government stealing from all to give to the dem/lib frauds and liars.
Where is the science? This pseudo-science, injected presumptions played as credible facts, from dem/libs, is almost laughable.
Where is the data? Where is the hypothesis, the theory, the study parameters and interpretations of data? Where is the comparative unit of measure? These things are real characteristics of real science, and the dem/libs haven’t even got a clue how far from real science they are. Lying has a way of making one stupid. In essence, as mom and dad taught us, dem/libs are only fooling themselves.
There is absolutely nothing credible from the bogus sites because everything is a fabrication.
Everything from liberals is just like my little brother, in third grade, “this guy I know…”, trying to fabricate credibility from a lie. Then he would ramble on to fabricate false truth and “science” to suit his goal, hoping to convince us to give him our money or whatever he wanted.
Notice too, that NOAA is a .gov entity. Government is part of this? Now there is a source for total dishonesty. Why do dem/libs pick and choose which lies from government they want to believe? Are dem/libs so lost in la-la-looney science land that they think it is okay for government to lie as long as it is only lying to conservatives and smart people? The average democrat is at least 10 IQ points below the average republican. Democrats have the uneducated Mexican/muslim vote to factor in their averages. I rest my case.
The fact is that more republicans graduate than democrats. How many Mexicans, do you know, that graduated from college? Do you know just one? The big fraud the democrats proffer is that Mexicans, invaders and the dregs of mexico, work hard, vote, and are recipients of higher education. Such stupidity, claims connected by nothing except dem/lib lies, is hilarious.
Mexicans in college? How is that possible when the morons cannot even speak English? Who is more ignorant, the Mexican or the dem/libs that persist with bogus claims that are so easily refuted a third grade Mexican him or herself could refute the “lies”?
Remember this and you will know the liberal/progressive/fascist mind: they always want something for no contribution of their own but boast of two things: what they plan to contribute and what they plan to force others to contribute.

SATIRE: AS ARCTIC ICE MELTS DUE TO NORMAL HEAT OF SUMMER…

As Arctic ice melts due to the NORMAL heat of SUMMER….

What a moron, utardia, writer on Craigslist.

Colder summers, colder winters, earlier falls, later springs, adds up to global hoaxing, not global warming.

They call it “climate change” now because if they had to call it “warming” they would have to defend their positions from everybody who knows the trends are cooling. They could call it pollution, what it really is, and that would direct resources to solve the real problems. As it is, the global hoaxers have no concerns for the real problems and real solutions: solutions that are definitely needed. They are more interested in compliance, oppression and control of We, the People, and lining their pockets as ignorant, deflective “expert” liars. They have the midas touch of turning other’s wealth into their own, by stealing through government. 

Global hoaxing is protectionism, the root of all tyrannies.

We are going into an ice age. Let us see if I can whip up the same fear and manipulation using the same tactics as the dem/lib hoaxers. I predict, in keeping with modern trends, that the earth will be in an ice age by  2750 ADHD. We can expect -300 degree temperatures and almost all life on the planet will be eliminated. We can expect to wake up very cold in the mornings, and when we look out the windows, we will not see the missing climate signals, that utardia left for our future use in 2750 ADHD.

When we look at the star placed above the squiggly lines and cool colors on my global hoaxer numbers chart x-axis versus un-measured temperature increases, on the y-axis, we see a really cool depiction of a pyramid. YAY, just what we wanted. It is quite pretty although there is a spot where we will have to change the results of our studies to make that left line a little straighter. Welcome to liberal la-la-land, global hoaxer-ville.

Most global hoaxers are so science-deficient and challenged they forget to leave one or the other axis off their “charts” and”graphs”. It is like not knowing enough to add flour to bake bread, and then claim it is baking. We witness, in every chart, claim, “news” report and post  more goofy fabricators left off their charts and science-ish models and projections.

Stephen Hawking was interviewed. When asked about climate change he stated, and I quote, “that utardia/scum-puppet, is a moron.”

It’s true. I read it in a “paper” about a consensus of scientists that consensussed together, panelling together to make a consensus of papers that claim the papers are consensus, regarding some scientists, a community of 32 million, that claim Stephen Hawking said just that.

This satire is probably much clearer to you, dear reader, than anything from utardia/scum-puppet/ weird dave/editor/predator, NOAA, WMO, NASA, and AAAS. We are wild and crazy global hoaxers, I mean guys.

Please, fellow Americans, lighten your lives with humor. Go to the aforementioned sites and read, from a perspective of science, the “stuff” they fabricate.

Imagine you are in your high school chemistry class and the lab instructor is introducing a lab experiment. Compare that experience to the fluff and stink of the sophist, pretentious, fraudulent words of the aforementioned sites.

I have made commentary, but I cannot cover it all.

Hawking continued, being the pure scientific mind he is, “All the evidence shows the earth is cooling, heat is escaping the planet in buckets, and I predict minus 100 degrees at the equator by 2750 ADHD.”

No, really, it is true. He actually said that. He consensussed with other global anti-hoaxers, in his usual scientific jargon. lol. Don’t you love, it, buckets? Funny?

Not much different than looking for missing climate of the Louisiana floods. Utardia concocted, “Searching for climate signals…”.

When was the last time “that thing next door, named climate, sent a signal? Was that his order by phone for pizza delivery?

“Climate signals”? that is too funny. 

Didn’t that moron utardia quote some source, hmmmmm, Hawking, who predicted 250 degree temperatures, like Mars, by 2050 because of CO2 emissions from the bottom of the ocean floor?

Is utardia that much of a moron!

When was the last time Hawking was on the ocean floor? When was utardia/political scum-puppet on the ocean floor? When was the last time anyone was on the ocean floor? When was the last time a god, was on the ocean floor, I mean except when he put frozen CO2 ice cakes down there, 250 billion years ago. Was utardia, that moronic dinosaur around then?

How much of fools does utardia take We, the People to be?

That mutt, for that presumption and morose attack on reality, deserves to swing.

It just takes one judge to issue a bench arrest for anyone of the thugs in power. We, the People will rally. We have seen it.

It just takes one!

CRAIGSLIST POST 6/21/16, “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.”

RE: “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” 

The following is my response to a post on craigslist in Salt Lake City, June 21, 2016.

In this post the “writer” plagiarizes NOAA with the title of the post and numerous claims throughout.

I write:

Show us the evidence.

What is a climate system? Is dimwit dem/lib talking about a “clime”, or maybe a weather front? These are real terms that reveal real science, understanding, and real knowledge, while “.warming of the climate system…” is at best a non-scientific construct of an alien-structured grammatical mess. Who, what, fabricated this poor collection of words and terms?

Do these dem/libs, fabricating goofy terms and words, think others will wet themselves and follow in line behind simpletons that cannot construct a rational thought?

What is a “…climate system”? What is, “Warming of the climate system…”? Climate is  warming and cooling. This dem/lib is speaking in circles to confuse readers and dazzle unsuspecting readers with his/her/its sophistry (look it up).

Scientific evidence? How could there be evidence when there is no data? Where are the volumes and pages of lists of university studies by PHD students submitting their theses? Where are the measurements, data? Evidence is non-existent without data and a measurement or two. Anyone can pick a topic, go to a library, look up in the indexes for studies done by PHD students on almost anything. This is cutting edge stuff. Anyone can go to the library, look up climate topics and find numerous studies showing the temperatures are dropping.

Suppose I make a claim to illustrate my superior knowledge.

“I know a yard is longer than a meter”, I state.

“How do you know?”, you ask. I reply. “I just know.”

You press, “how long is a yard?” I say, “pretty long, the evidence shows it.” You ask, “how long is a meter?”

I reply, “almost as long as a yard.” You think you have me so you ask me, “If you are comparing the two, how can you know one is longer than the other if you cannot actually compare them. How can you know anything about either measurement if you refer to no studies that compare them, and if you cannot define how long either is?” I reply, “I just know it, the evidence is there.”

Anyone, at this point would ask, “what evidence?”

Besides the fact that I would be dead wrong regarding a yard being longer than the meter, one could also note I totally rejected scientific methodology.

A meter is a full yard plus 3.6 more, MORE inches, making a meter longer than a yard. That is a comparison using a common standard of measuring, to compare the two. This qualifies as data applied. Using one or the other as a standard, and then comparing, would be considered data.

You ask me again, to explain the comparison between the two, and how I can make a comparison without actually comparing variables; without common measurements or data to compare. I reply, “scientific evidence for measuring the measure of a longer yard than a meter, is unequivocal.” At this point you realize you are talking to an uneducated, egomaniacal moron, just as we, the educated and honest conservatives try to communicate with dem/libs, living in “I am special in liberal la-la-land.”

Using an inch to measure two “systems”, and then comparing, we see that a meter is longer than a yard, but a dem/lib would argue against that, if it meant he or she could propagate government stealing from all to give to the dem/lib frauds and liars.

Where is the science? This pseudo-science, injected presumptions played as credible facts, from dem/libs, is almost laughable.

Where is the data? Where is the hypothesis, the theory, the study parameters and interpretations of data? Where is the comparative unit of measure? These things are real characteristics of real science, and the dem/libs haven’t even got a clue how far from real science they are. Lying has a way of making one stupid. In essence, as mom and dad taught us, dem/libs are only fooling themselves.

There  is absolutely nothing credible from the bogus sites because everything is a fabrication.

Everything from liberals is just like my little brother, in third grade, “this guy I know…”, trying to fabricate credibility from a lie. Then he would ramble on to fabricate false truth and “science” to suit his goal, hoping to convince us to give him our money or whatever he wanted.

Notice too, that NOAA is a .gov entity. Government is part of this? Now there is a source for total dishonesty. Why do dem/libs pick and choose which lies from government they want to believe? Are dem/libs so lost in la-la-looney science land that they think it is okay for government to lie as long as it is only lying to conservatives and smart people? The average democrat is at least 10 IQ points below the average republican. Democrats have the uneducated Mexican/muslim vote to factor in their averages. I rest my case.

The fact is that more republicans graduate than democrats. How many Mexicans, do you know, that graduated from college? Do you know just one? The big fraud the democrats proffer is that Mexicans, invaders and the dregs of Mexico, work hard, vote, and are recipients of higher education. Such stupidity, claims connected by nothing except dem/lib lies, is hilarious.

Mexicans in college? How is that possible when the morons cannot even speak English? Who is more ignorant, the Mexican or the dem/libs that persist with bogus claims that are so easily refuted a third grade Mexican him or herself could refute the “lies”?

Remember this and you will know the liberal/progressive/fascist mind: they always want something for no contribution of their own but boast of two things: what they plan to contribute and what they plan to force others to contribute.