3.15.2015

1 3 ♥ 0 0 ♥ 0 2 ♥ 0 4 ♥ 1 1 ♥ Dies Sol: It's Solar Variation, Retards...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm
http://www.wunderground.com/climate/facts.asp

I find it ironic how this groups are only skeptical towards proof that violates in what they believe.  Climate Change/Global Warming believers are eager to believe others are cherry picking data because their follow acolytes have been proven to cherry pick data and promote biased readings since the beginning.

So they cherry pick more biased readings to imply that the Sun is getting colder, instead of becoming more luminous such as it is.

http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/its-the-sun-stupid/ ~ Edmond Contoski
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/scientists-Milankovitch-cycles-orbit-variations/2015/03/11/id/629605/

There are others reports both scholarly and news related that the acolytes sifted through, and they picked this one.

It's the Sun, Stupid. ~ Willie Soon, Ph.D.

Maybe they took the title personally... they are mentally ill afterall.  Yes I 'should' know who is by sight alone. :)  Please understand that Statism comes from #DistrictofColumbia and exists in both pseudo fake parties. {Democrat [1][2] & Republicrat [1][2]}

{Statism ~ The belief that government has the noble and just authority to do that which would be criminal if done by an individual. The belief that the right man holding life-or-death power over your neighbors will fix everything, whether your neighbor likes it or not. The belief that an expropriating property protector is not a contradiction in terms. The belief that making people buy goods and services they do not want or need, did not ask for, and have even actively objected to, is morally acceptable. The belief that people in the right costumes are above the law, and empowered to create laws to govern other people, while arguing that everyone is equal under the law.}

All the Climate Change/Global Warming acolytes have to answer to this is to cherry pick one major study and then employ impropriety based on who funded the research.  They use degrading, false, slanderous insults instead of actual proof that any impropriety actually occurred.

As I said, the acolytes are merely reflecting their own lack of morals or ethics on everyone else.  Apparently it is inconceivable to them that someone may actually have a backbone and tell a sponsor to go pound sand.

However, I pray that these pseudo-religious acolytes continue with this elementary sandbox mentality.  Those who are without the mental dis-ease of statism are the opposite of impressed.

KNOWLEDGE