›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Take that Al Gore!

HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
edited June 2008 in Flamewars
Global Warming and the Price of a Gallon of Gas. John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel issues his challenge to Al Gore.

Comments

  • JasonJason
    /Bury for being poorly written.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    edited June 2008
    /Bury for being poorly written.
    It is also full of some very flawed logic.
    Post edited by HMTKSteve on
  • JasonJason
    It also full of some very flawed logic.
    /Bury for being poorly written.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited June 2008
    John Coleman is a septuagenarian hack. His opinion on anything, with the possible exception of what Denny's location has the best early bird special, is simply not persuasive.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • chaosof99chaosof99
    edited June 2008
    John Coleman is a complete idiot and puppet. I think the best argument is "There is no significant man made global warming. There has not been any in the past, [...]". Of course not. When before the last century did we blow up this much carbondioxide into the air. And when did we have the technology and interest to measure it?

    desmogblog.com stated it the best: "Forget science, we got ourselves a conspiracy theorist!"
    Post edited by chaosof99 on
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    Sad thing is I was really looking forward to the legal showdown over this. Now, looking at the words of the guy who is leading the charge, all I can think of is Intelligent Design and Epic Fail.
  • a1sa1s
    John Coleman is a septuagenarian hack.
    I just love the precise word for word reprint from the article in those quotes.
    anyway, the fact the Coleman is old is not only chronist, but ultimately irrelevant as he doesn't say anything smart, he just says that what he sees, which is:
    a)as a layman (and as a weatherman) he notes that it's not hotter outside then it was a year ago on this day.
    b)there are scientists (i.e other people who are supposedly smart) who support this point of view.

    I mean yes, sure he seems stupid, by saying that 38 parts to a 100'000 is irrelevant, and confusing a cube with a square, as well as trying to promote petroleum overuse , but like I said he doesn't have to be smart, he just needs to say what he is told to say.

    P.S. I get the "Epic Fail", but what does IntDes have to do with it?
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    I say Intelligent Design because when I read the piece I get the feeling that he is a crazy person.
Sign In or Register to comment.