Howeird Is That?

I've been getting some mean-spirited complaints from "scientists" who don't seem to get common sense, that this website supposedly employs poor "logic" (there's that word again. Man, them scientists sure care a lot about logic! What a good strategy... just turn off your brains, stop actually thinking about it, and instead just use logic. Talk about sticking your head in the sand!).

There's no use in debating about this. We won the debate. The scientists like to say that there's no debate about global warming but there is, because many folks don't accept the science. Is the science right? That's debatable. Therefore there is a debate. And the debate was won by the rational skeptics (those of us who are equally skeptical about everything the scientists say about global warming happening, instead of just cherry-picking what to be skeptical about). There's no way we're going to change our mind, no matter what so-called "evidence" you present. Therefore the issue is settled. There is a debate, and it's over.

Unless you scientists invent some new scientific "law" that says that common sense is false (and good luck getting that one through congress), then you have lost. Common sense has proved that C2O doesn't generate any heating in the atmosphere, and even less in the deep sea.

That's all there is to it, folks. That's called "checkmate." The issue is settled, the debate is over, the skeptics have destroyed the other team in a bloody massacre that has left nothing but severed heads and many many mangled carcasses (like a bunch of stupid baby seals).

Scientists, stop whining and complaining about it. You just don't get it. The issue here is that we were right. Just accept it and move on. Stop showing us "new data" that fits your "models". It doesn't matter any more. I wouldn't believe in global warming until things heated up so much that the very last living thing on Earth boiled to death. Even then I wouldn't believe it. Because the issue is not about how hot it is (that's called weather, folks, and it's a natural phenomenon. Want proof? There was weather before humans even got here. Read a history book if you don't believe me!). The issue is about who was right. We have proven, using science, that all of science is wrong, and that C2O doesn't generate heat. It's not as simple as the AGWer liars would trick you into believing. There are many factors involved: volcanoes, the sun, clouds rubbing together. It's not just about "a little bit of hot gas." Therefore global warming is uncertain. What more does any sane individual need to accept that that means that the theory of global warming is completely and absolutely certainly false?!

So stop whining about how hot it's getting. No matter how hot the planet gets and we all die, it doesn't matter, because global warming is still wrong, and we are right.

All the idiots who are worried about high C2O levels apparently never opened up a history book. Try opening one up, and you'll see that hysterical levels of C2O were once a lot higher than they are today. And I'm talking about the full hysterical record here. I'm talking about page one of those history books. Right back in the beginning when God was still making the continents out of lava, before any trees were around to make oxygen. Back then, C2O levels were at least twice as high as they are today, maybe even three times. And mankind had no problem surviving through that one... so why worry now?

What I don't get about all the leftist tree-hugging nutcase environmentalists is: Why do you have such a problem with humans terraforming the earth and smoothing it out and basically making use of the environment to transform it into something a little nicer and more modern? And yet, you all love the trees so much, even though it was the trees that came along and terraformed the earth way back when.

As we've already established here, dangerously high levels of C2O are perfectly harmless. Yet it was the trees who changed that rich, thick atmosphere into one that is dangerously deprived of C2O, which all green-colored plants and animals need to survive. Can you imagine a species that would change the earth so much that it would endanger its own survival? Such a species is surely contemptible and worthless. The idiot tree-huggers love a certain species of animals -- the trees -- which have ruined the atmosphere so much that there's hardly any C2O left in it at all. There's so little C2O left in the atmosphere (just trace amounts now), that it's inconceivable that any plants could even survive any more. In fact, that is probably what's killing all of the diminishing amazon forest that gets cut down every year. Who will be laughing when all the trees have killed themselves and all plants on the planet have died, and yet mankind keeps on surviving? Me, for one. Not the trees, that's for certain. Idiots.

Man on the other hand, is not doing anything to significantly change the environment, unlike the stupid trees. Think about it. It would take a person a hundred days to walk around the circumference of the Earth (from one edge to the other edge). That's a huge amount of space for a single person! A person is so small compared to the world. It is impossible that that single person could have any effect at all on something so big. Let alone heat the whole thing up. You'd have to run your furnace non-stop for days, with all the windows open, and it probably wouldn't even heat up the world even one measly degree. Think about it.

Yes folks, we are small, insignificant things in this world. It is simply impossible that any species could have any measurable effect on the planet at all. It's doubly impossible that we could harm the entire planet, after all of the changes we've made to make it better. Not until we conquer the whole thing, will we be able to affect it in the slightest. And yet, for some reason the leftists seem to have a problem with conquering the entire environment. Crazy!

It's like those idiot environmentalists just don't understand math at all, or the law of small numbers. The law of small numbers says it's impossible that mankind can have any effect on the environment. The law of small numbers says that if you add up or multiply a bunch of small numbers, you're still going to end up with some pretty small numbers. And "one" person is a small number. Multiply that one by itself a few thousand times for all the people on earth, and you probably won't get more than about seven (I don't have my calculator with me so I've had to approximate).

And that's a pretty small number. Seven isn't going to do anything against the thousands and thousands, maybe even millions, of atoms the make up the earth. Think about it.

It's like the leftists don't even consider these things.

It scares me that people like that can have a say in what we should do with some valuable clear-cut land, or in what I put in my gas tank (oil, or wind, etc).

The debate is over folks. The AGW crowd lost. There is just one convenient truth that destroys the entire theory of global warming completely, and nails its coffin to the wall.

C2O just plain doesn't generate heat. (Maybe a little heat might be generated by the C atoms rubbing against the O atoms, but since it's a trace gas anyway it would only be trace heat.)

This is just plain old science, folks. (Plain science is the only good kind of science. Pretty much anything from before 1905 was pretty good.)

Think of it this way: C20 is like putting a coat on the Earth. Does your coat have a heater in it? No! (Well, I know one guy who has a coat with a heater in it, but none of mine do.) Your winter coat does not heat you. Your body heat does. Now here's the important part: Your body heat is there whether you're wearing a coat or not! The coat adds ZERO heat!

It's the same with C2O. It does not heat the Earth.

Now, it's true that coats keep you warm. That extra warmth means that there is extra energy to be radiated out of you. Any extra energy you have will increase your rate of cooling. The increased thermal energy and the increased radiative cooling reach what's called "equilibrium", which means that there is no net difference in body temperature. This is 6th grade science, folks!

Folks, this is really simple stuff. Any idiot can understand this. Folks like you and me get this. What's truly baffling is why the so-called "educated" people don't get it. These are nails in coffins, folks!

To prove once and for all -- yet again! -- that global warming is a big phony lie, I will wear my winter coat all summer and show that I, just like the Earth, will not get any warmer than the temperature that my natural body heat warms me to!

---

Addendum: I've had to end the experiment early. I've found that going out in the sun with the coat on was just unbearable.

The experiment was a success in that it identified the real culprit. This is additional proof that the AGWers are stupid liars. Just like with the Earth, it is the sun that caused the warming, not whether or not I'm wearing a coat.


I guess this really makes fools out of anyone who ever backed solar power. After all the hoopla and fizzle-fazzle, it turns out that it's not quite as harmless as oil after all!

The skeptics have shown once again that everyone else is stupid about yet another thing. Just look at these stunningly lopsided graphs over at The World According to Watts. They show the heat capacity of the air versus the much more significant ocean... and make you wonder what's all the fuss over air about, anyway?!

Why on Earth do any of those idiot scientists even care about surface air temperatures when it makes so little difference compared to sea temperatures?! In fact, including Earth's crust and core temperatures, air becomes entirely negligible. Temperatures on the surface and in the air are just a phony meaningless measure that purposefully hides all the other temperature data from beneath the surface, not to mention high high above it, too! I've yet to see a credible scientific study of climate that doesn't fail to include temperatures on the moon. Do you know why? Because it's extremely cold on the moon! The scientists just happen to "forget" to include any data that don't fit their agenda.

Deep sea temperatures are where it's at. They don't show any significant heating.

Besides, in the future, when "they" claim all this global warming's supposed to be taking place in the air (which is completely made up of insignificant trace gases that have no impact on life or on humans)... like 50 or 20 years from now, most of us will have evolved to live under the sea anyway. Down there, where there's no weather to bother all the chicken-little scientists, what will they spend all their time worrying about? Jellyfish? Loch Ness monsters? While the rest of us are relaxing, enjoying exploring reefs and growing our sea-businesses, I'm sure they'll find something new to tremble about.

---

Addendum: I was doing some real blog science using numbers and a spreadsheet, and came to a startling realization about what I wrote above. It is this:

Air surface temperatures could go up a thousand degrees and every human being could by cooked until they're extra tasty crispy, and yet the average Earth temperature including the sea (and the core of course) would change by less than a degree. That is hardly enough for anyone to even notice.

Just imagine the entire Earth in flames, and yet as a whole I'd barely feel the change in it at all. To me, that image really drives home (like a last nail in an AGW coffin) the insignificance of air in all of this debate.

Polar bears, rain forests, air... all such precious "important" things to the greenies, but try to get them to worry about the stock market like the rest of us, and suddenly their care bear stare turns into a sour, Grinchy frown.

Could this be the final solution and the last of a never-ending sequence of "final nails in the AGW coffin"? Presented here is the way to win the climate war.

We all know the Warmmunists love to lie, but they also love to talk. They just won't shut up about it. Everything you read these days, someone from the AGW crowd will bring up climate change. If it's a story about the future, they'll mention climate change. If it's a story about ocean currents, they'll mention climate change. If it's a story about sustainable food supply, low and behold!, someone's going to mention climate change. It's like they think that everything to do with life on Earth has something to do with the environment! It's sickening.

But here's the thing. The evil lying corrupt AGW scumbag jerks are just like politicians in a lot of ways. And politicians will keep repeating their message until people believe it. So as long as we Exuberant Upholders of The Glorious Truth refuse to believe the lies, they will keep regurgitating it out of their frothing mouths, like an overflowing and overused plugged toilet. It's almost like they won't stop trying to warn us about climate change until we listen.

Perhaps all we have to do is let them think that they won, and maybe they'll shut up for awhile. When someone says "The Earth is going to raise a billion degrees in the next hundred years," instead of fighting back with Common Sense, perhaps we could just say "Oh really? Okay, if you say so." When someone says "Many people will struggle to deal with harsh conditions in the coming decades," instead of laughing heartily and poking fun, we could stifle our laughter and just say "Aw that's sad."

So we just keep mum and let the AGWers run out of steam. Even when the latest climate "data" is falsely claimed to show warming, we will just smile a knowing smile and say "Okay." Even when naturally occurring droughts and fire-storm seasons ravage the planet and the AGWers say that "it's due to climate change!", we will simply say "If you say so" and let them calm their chicken-little hysteria. Even if the sea levels rise and crops fail and many species go extinct and the AGWers prattle on about it, we just stay silent and share a knowing wink that says "This isn't really happening."

Make them believe that we get it, and perhaps they'll stop trying so hard to make us understand.

Then, a hundred years from now, when we're happily burning a thousand times the oil that we're burning today just to stay warm enough through the coming ice age, their voices will have become so weakened that we won't even hear them over the sound of the 3000 hp American engines in our flying cars.

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.