scuro2

You are right MB if you are a denier that doesn't mean you should be associated with Donald Trump...or Sarah Palin for that matter. Just because these public figures believe basically the same thing as deniers only really means nothing more then it's an incredible coincidence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMF-0DKSmK4

Pray to your master Deniers. He knows what your thinking!

Gee, the Donald sounds a lot like Sarah Palin who sounds a lot like the majority of the opinions on this thread. Yu all' go to the same church?

Someone else wrote that? What an awesome job they did in highlighting what an ignoramus blowhard Trump really is. Did they do this monologue too? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1UVo66q_bI

Donald Trump isn't worthy of cleaning Obama's shoes. Below is awesome video of Obama showing how to respond to Trump stupid talk.

Ahh...you are getting your knickers in knot about the integrity of the topic. Well good on you Glen. We don't want any stray thoughts hijacking this elegant line of reasoning that has been presented by many esteemed members here!! What a travesty it would be if someone talked about fishing in a politico bashing thread!!!

Exactly. It used to be that you would mainly see fishing reports and fishing related posts that people shared selflessly, and that was inspiring.

Some of my best fishing memories were fishing with my daughter. Thanks for posting and putting a smile on my face.

Because how else do they get that data from way back when to show CO2 levels back 400,000 years ago? That reminds me of the "Obama hating" Tim Thomas. I'm sure he's a DENIER too!

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ LO AND BEHOLD A GRAPH THAT GOES BACK MORE THEN A THOUSAND YEARS From Nasa,.those conspiracy hungry, money loving government stooges. Why do they keep on making graphs of nothing!?!?!!!!!?

This post probably made the keenest observation of the last batch. Indirectly I'm defending Wynne by making the case that climate change exists. I don't like that position. If you are a denier those around you don't like being put in that position either. When the obvious is denied because of willful ignorance or politics you get polarization, those you try to influence don't vote like you. There have been awesome Conservatives and I have voted for them. I am fiscally conservative by nature yet the recent Ontario and Federal Conservative parties have chosen leaders who have been catering to Commonsensers and these leaders have sucked. Frankly I think Climate Change to be such an important issue that I have just voting Green party and will continue to do so until there is concrete change. I voted like that back with Reform when our deficits were at crisis levels.

Here is a better graphic, it is based on data.

Not nice all the time, but nice to others. There is a big difference. I'd bet that if you got headbutted in the face and you needed someone to open a door for you because you were disoriented or had blood in your eyes, that other toddlers, besides your own, would open that door. That is if they could reach the handle.

There is a difference between sharing what you have and being nice to others. I have a hard time sharing MY fishing rods and reels. Toddlers will stop doing enjoyable things just to be nice to someone who needs a little help.

Yup, you were born already set to be nice to others.

I thought Conservative meant intelligent evidence based policy, the goal of which is to conserve what we have and use limited dollars in the most efficient way for the common good of Ontario or Canada. Perhaps I'm not communicating with Conservatives.

Makers of electrical cars, renewable energy sources such as solar energy, battery makers like Telsa with their rechargeable garage battery.

I would reply that there is a very obvious and measurable historical relationship of C02 in the air and temperature. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/temperature-change.html When you look at that graph the high end is 300 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere. We are at 380 ppm and rising. The rise in CO2 is not linear, it is curved which means exponential growth and mostly likely not an a continuous gradual change in temperature. We are currently near the bottom of the curve so changes will not seem as dramatic, until they are. 12 months of record high global temperatures is highly unusual. If one takes into account that this was an El Nino year then if we take the average of an El Nino once every 4 years there would have been 41 El Nino events since 1850 when we first started measuring and recording global temperatures. The odds of 12 record months in a row in El Nino years would: 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 x 1/40 = 1.6777216 to the exponent 19 You are right, temperature rise won't go straight up but climate events that we are seeing now are already extraordinary. By coincidence the ice is melting quickly this year on the north pole http://icons.wxug.com/hurricane/2016/charctic-5.19.16.jpg You'll get your answer before your dead...all we need is for melting to occur on Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets, and several feet of added water to the oceans will disrupt the world as we know it. Here is Vancouver with 2 meter higher sea level. http://jaybanks.ca/images/2014/05/Vancouver-Flood-Map-2-Meter-Sea-Level-Rise-Simulation.PNG

Well I did take that info from pubmed. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470496/who pinned it on the marketers who manipulated the Drs by giving them free product. Take a look. Also, your way of rationalizing that super majority of scientists who believe climate change to be real was to state, "97% of scientists are funded to study from outside sources that have an agenda right?" What you describe would be a conspiracy. If climate change didn't exist, to then get many scientists from around the globe to agree to one giant FRAUD. Many people would have to be in on it because the data presented is so rich and comes from many sources.

Here is a tidbit for those who haven't yet determined that climate science is a hoax perpetrated by the world wide scientific community. Accurate weather measurements go back to 1850. Thus the odds of every record month would be 1/164. If weather is random then calculating the odds of 12 record months in a row would look like this 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 x 1/164 Those are very slim odds.

It was marketing people who determined that DOCTORS preferred one particular brand over another. They did this by surveying them at conferences after they got free cigarettes. And that is the problem with conspiracy theories, there are no facts to verify so basically anyone can claim anything and you can't refute it.

Naively I believed that the vast majority of Pharma scientists are seeking scientific solutions to health problems so that they can make their company lots of cash. The conspiracy of scientists goes through government, universities, and all major corporations?!?? WHO KNEW? Well I guess for this giant conspiracy of scientists to work, it would have to be VERY VERY secret. Sssshhhhh

Ah the ol "scientists are bought" conspiracy theory. I was waiting for this UGLY TRUTH to come out. Wait a second...scientists are often funded by industry...so.....industry is creating the climate change FRAUD? Or do you mean government funded scientists who must of been approached individually and secretly bribed. That would mean that almost all of them accepted the cash!!!! WHAT A STORY....60 minutes should get on that. Or are you talking about University scientists who would risk their jobs to FAKE the TRUTH?!?!??? This whole conspiracy theory is getting VERY COMPLICATED.

Obviously the guy had marked his territory by pissing on all the nearby rocks and trees. If you can't respect that what else is a man to do?

You make fishing with little kids look fun! Nice report!