The internet is the modern day roman forum, where people of every class and level of stupidity or intelligence can mix freely and equally. It's made up of real people, trustworthy people, who are providing good old-fashioned honest factual opinions. They're not people with hidden agendas, implored to lie for their insatiable lust for congress gold. And that's why you can always trust what you read on the internet. It's a safe haven from all the confusing lies and riddles of the scientists.

Of course, everyone knows about the site Watt's Up With Facts, which is the de facto site for finding fair and balanced news from both sides of the climate debate. However, I personally think that the site is run by a Warmmuninst sympathizer. Why do I think that?
1. The site is too fair. This is war after all, and all is fair in war, including unfairness. The scientists don't play fair, why should we?! The scientists use facts and evidence wherever they can, and nearly all of that supports their side. If they were fair at all, they would make sure to balance the evidence on both sides of the argument. Watt's Up With Junk should at the very least throw in even more deceitful posts and feigned ignorance to balance things out a bit.
2. Some of the posts on the site are just plain ridiculous and unbelievable. It makes me think that the author is actually trying to do harm to the plight of the Enlightened Skeptics of Truth, by writing sarcastically silly posts that might make people think, notice the ridiculousness, and perhaps side with the evil science Factocracy.

That brings us around to The Climate Scum. Here is a site with just the right balance of hard-hitting opinion, and bile-spitting honest-to-goodness spite against the Warmmunists.

The whole reason for Howeird Is That's existence is to provide a fair alternative for all people who don't want to be told how things are in the climate debate, but would rather view the facts for themselves, decide (with our help of course) which ones to interpret and which ones to ignore, and figure out for themselves what they believe about actual reality vs. the lies of climate change. The Climate Scum is all that you need for that. So all readers of Howeird should bookmark that site and read it regularly. Keep fighting the Good Fight against the Bad Guys, oh climate heroes!

---

Speaking of which... I haven't done a post on Arctic Sea Ice in a very long time. However, I just noticed that there was a day last week when the sea ice increased from the day before, which I think is news worthy. So don't think that the lack of reports on it means that the sea ice isn't increasing just as much as the days in that one winter when I was reporting on it every damn day.

Professor Tim Flannery: "if we cut emissions today global temperatures are not likely to drop for about 1000 years".

So you're telling me that if we completely stopped causing the problem, today, it would take 1000 years for the problem to fix itself?

I laughed so hard that my triple-thick peanut butter and bacon latte smoothy shot out of my nose. Why on Earth should I care about stopping destroying the planet if the destruction that I've already done (which I probably haven't and anyone who says I have is a liar) will last another 1000 years? It only makes sense to me that I should keep on doing what I'm doing (which is not causing a problem), because if I've already caused a problem (which I haven't), it's too late, and I might as well continue making it even worse for as long as I can.

It's like this: If we blew up the planet, it would take billions of years for it to form and return to a viable state. Who cares what happens after a billion years?! Al Gore?! Since it takes so long to fix the problem, I don't see how it could matter whether or not we try to stop the problem. Whether or not we blow up the world now, it won't even matter in a billion years. The only people who care are the scientists, who care more about their precious environment than they do about the economy, but only because they can keep scamming congress for grant money by saying that blowing up the world is so terribly bad, even though it doesn't even make a difference.

Often I'll get into a debate with some Global Warmmunists on topics like these, and as predictably as the lottery, they'll always try to bring up logic as a part of their argument. As if logic proves anything about one side or the other! You just know that someone's lost an argument if they're so desperate and run out of opinions that they have to turn to logic as a last-ditch effort at salvation.

The way I see it, if you need to think about your side of the argument, it's probably wrong. My side just makes sense. I don't have to waste a second thinking about anything. How could anyone trying to use logic and other trickery have a chance standing up against something that you already know sounds right?

Ahhh... what stupid idiots everyone is.